Vote to decide SEC East Champion?

[ScottVib]

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/200....ap/index.html

And we thought the BCS was screwed up... this could be the most interesting election in awhile if it came to pass.

Start the campaign
If Florida beats Georgia, SEC East champ could be decided by vote
Posted: Wednesday October 22, 2003 8:10PM; Updated: Wednesday October 22, 2003 8:54PM




ATHENS, Ga. (AP) -- The SEC could be involved in a vote every bit as intriguing as the 2000 presidential election or the California recall.

If Florida, Tennessee and Georgia wind up in a three-way tie for first in the SEC East, the tie might have to be broken by going to the seventh, and final, entry on the list of tiebreakers: a vote of athletic directors.


If such a vote is necessary, the ADs from Kentucky, South Carolina and the second- through sixth-place finishers in the SEC West would be joined by a representative from Vanderbilt (which no longer has an athletic director, per se) to determine the SEC East champion. The SEC West champion would be excluded from voting so it wouldn't have a say in determining who it plays in the title game.

The scenario, once viewed as farfetched, would become more likely if the 25th-ranked Gators (5-3, 3-2), who are idle this week, defeat No. 4 Georgia (6-1, 4-1) next week in Jacksonville. From there, Florida, Georgia and No. 22 Tennessee (4-2, 2-2) would have to win the rest of their conference games and finish 6-2 in conference.

If that happens, the first tiebreaker -- head-to-head -- wouldn't resolve anything since Florida would have defeated Georgia, Georgia has defeated Tennessee and Tennessee has defeated Florida.

The teams would tie with 4-1 records in the division, the second tiebreaker.

The third -- records against the fourth, fifth and sixth-place finishers in the East -- would also be a wash.

Tiebreakers 4 through 6 all involved results against teams in the other division, and none would break the tie, either because the teams all had the same record against the West (2-1), or because all three don't have games against a common opponent from the West.

That would lead to the seventh tiebreaker, which is a vote of the ADs. Other conferences give preference to teams with a higher ranking, or to teams that have the longest absence from the title game or a top bowl game. But there are no such guidelines in the SEC.

Rather, it would be a free-for-all, likely decided over a conference call on Sunday, Nov. 30, the day after the last regular-season game is played.

SEC spokesman Charles Bloom said changing the tiebreaker has never been a hot-button issue, possibly because a vote of athletic directors has never been needed.

"In a perfect world, this is not the most favorable of outcomes," Bloom said.

What if the vote comes out with a tie for first?

Bloom promised that the ADs would "come out of the meeting with a consensus."

[GrantDawg]

Let's just hope that UGA wins and there will be no need for this.

[Poli]

I may be a big time Vols fan, but if this were to happen, I think UGA would still take the East.

[SunDancer]

They should go based on highest BCS ranking

[FBPro]

Originally posted by GrantDawg
Let's just hope that UGA wins and there will be no need for this.

Amen!

[Ksyrup]

The winner: the school of the AD who hires Mike Price as a consultant and is able to show the swing votes a "proper" good time.

[KevinNU7]

Why not the team with the best +/-?

[digamma]

Originally posted by SunDancer
They should go based on highest BCS ranking

One might argue they should leave out the team with the highest BCS ranking, particularly if that team is in the top 10 in the BCS, and hopefully increase the chances of landing two teams in the BCS and maximizing conference revenue.

Keep in mind that when conferences have placed two teams in the BCS, they have never been the two teams that played in the conference championship game.

I am guessing that Georgia would still have the highest BCS ranking, even if it were to lose to Florida (and particularly if Florida were to lose to FSU and Tennessee were to lose to Miami). Let's say, then, that UGA wins a vote and loses to a 1-2 loss LSU team or a 3 loss Auburn team in the SEC Championship game. UGA, then has 3 losses and is probably not considered for a BCS bowl. However, if they don't get voted into the championship game, they have two losses, still sit in the top 10, can boast that all of Bulldog Nation will follow them to the BCS game and look like a strong candidate for an at large bid.

[dacman]

digamma brings up my big issue with conference championship games. The loser will likely play themselves right out of a BCS bowl due to the lateness of the loss in the season, thus reducing the chances of two teams in the BCS, IMHO. Plus, it can't be good to have a guarantee that one of the top two teams in your conference will finish the regular season with a loss.

Of course, the BCS revised the payouts for a 2nd team in the same conference such that having that 2nd team in a BCS bowl doesn't create a financial windfall for ONE conference, but the extra exposure of having 2 teams in the BCS bowls is big, IMO.
My ideal conference would be 9 teams with each playing each other once every year for 8 conference games. You'd still have a good shot at 2 BCS bowl teams if one team went 8-0 in conference and the next went 7-1. In basketball, you'd have a 16-game round robin conference schedule which also works well.

edit: spelling