JacketOff
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 3,012
The “G” conferences only exist the way they do because they’ve been neutered by decades of realignment caused by a total lack of representation at the championship level. The Big East was a legitimate power conference as late as 2001, and now doesn’t even exist. Hell, the PAC 10/12 was a legitimate power conference until this year until it got absolutely annihilated by realignment.
When you take all of the best teams in a conference and put them in a new one, of course the conference will suffer. If those teams/conferences had legitimate paths to a championship we wouldn’t be in this mess we’re in now. Money and attention was way more diversified before the era of super conferences. Since the introduction of the BCS there’s never been less parity at the top levels of the sport, even more so since the CFP. Imagine any real professional sport not allowing division/conference winners to compete in their playoff system because they “aren’t good enough.” They won their conference. If they aren’t good enough to even have a chance to play for the championship why is that conference even in the league. One of the primary arguments for going to a playoff in the first place is so smaller programs or teams in non-power conferences could play their way in. But all that’s happened is the big schools and power conferences (read SEC/B1G) have continued to stack the odds and politic to have more spots and more power.
Here’s the breakdown on conferences in the final AP poll from 1998
5 from the Big 10
5 from the Big 12
3 from the SEC
3 from the ACC
3 from the Big East
2 from the PAC 10
1 each from the WAC, CUSA, and independent
You’re telling me a playoff featuring every conference champion and maybe a couple of at-large bids of this era wouldn’t have been wildly entertaining and drive parity. There’s 8 conferences and 1 independent ranked, also no conference had more than 2 teams in the top 10. But sure, let’s just put 7 SEC and 5 B1G teams in the playoff every year.
