From the Max Olson article, it isn't a requirement that t he B12 have a CCG, but are allowed to. The B12 members will have to vote/approve a CCG. So it becomes a risk/reward analysis of the pros and cons of implementing such a game. That is where, the discussion of having the game will include many of the points brought up in the responses above.
I didn't believe the Div 1 council would ever approve, but if you think of it in terms of a pure rematch every year, they, the other conferences that is, may (note I did not say "DO") see it as an opportunity to allow the B12 to remove itself from consideration by having an undefeated or high ranked program lose to a team they already beat once. While this may not always happen, we as Longhorn fans have experienced this in the past...For a couple of examples, in 1999 we beat Nebraska in the regular season, but lost to them in the CCG, and again in 2001 against Colorado, a team we destroyed in the regular season, but collapsed against in the CCG.
Rematches are nothing new, but every year being a rematch? That's going to take some serious thought and analysis before approval by the Conference. Why run the risk of a clear champ from round robin play being eliminated from the already musical chairs game the playoffs are currently? I like the idea better of conference requiring all members to strengthen their schedules by playing P5 teams for OOC play, which is not a guarantee of a place at the dance, but lessens the probability of elimination due to a poor performance in a rematch.
Whatever happens with the CCG approach, the head honchos making the decision need to thoroughly discuss the issue and make a careful and critical examination of all the probabilities, pro and con, and not look solely at the money from such a game, thereby losing site of the bigger reward.
-
Like x 2
Last edited: Jan 14, 2016