BIG 12 Wins Vote For Championship Game

Discussion in 'On The Field' started by Godz40acres, Jan 13, 2016.

  1. Godz40acres

    Godz40acres Happy Feller

    Per BR:
    After playing the last five years without a conference championship game, the Big 12 will bring it back after winning an NCAA vote.

    Brian Davis of the Austin American-Statesman reported Wednesday that the NCAA vote granted the Big 12 its right to stage a title game featuring the top two teams in the conference during the regular season.

    The vote was not unanimous, as Dan Wolken of USA Today reported the ACC and American Athletic Conference voted against this version of the Big 12 Championship Game, with the ACC seeking full deregulation of the current system.

    Big 12 commissioner Bob Bowlsby told Davis the conference "ended up with a compromise we can live with."

    However, per Davis, Bowlsby did not seem enthusiastic about this solution by noting the title game "guarantees an automatic rematch from the regular season."

    Now, the Big 12 has earned the right to bring back its title game in the hopes of making sure a situation like 2014 doesn't have to happen again. The committee can keep the conference's top team fresh in its mind when debating which teams deserve to compete for a national championship.
  2. Godz40acres

    Godz40acres Happy Feller

    As I posted several months ago (as suggested by a sports writer), the highest rated team should get home field for the playoff game.

    Imagaine UT at home at DKR against ou.

    It. Would. Be. Epic!

    • Like Like x 3
  3. PecosBill

    PecosBill 1,000+ Posts

    So B12 gets $20Million+ CCG
  4. NJlonghorn

    NJlonghorn 1,000+ Posts

    UT at Norman for all the marbles would be epic as well, albeit less so.
  5. nashhorn

    nashhorn 5,000+ Posts

    Don't like it. In general I do not like when teams play same team again. Our entire conference concept is designed so as to prevent this.
    • Like Like x 6
  6. BevoJoe

    BevoJoe 10,000+ Posts

    Now the fun begins....and the answer to aggy is NO!! You can't come back!

    How's for 2 divisions, 5 teams in each. We could follow the sec model:
    Play everyone in your division, 4 games
    Play 2 teams from the other division
    Play 6 creampuffs, at home
    Then have the CCG

    Advantage: Every team in the B12 is 6-0 bowl eligible and conference play hasn't started yet!

    You guys do realize my proposal is total ******** right? :smokin:
    • Like Like x 2
    Last edited: Jan 13, 2016
  7. PecosBill

    PecosBill 1,000+ Posts

    Would have been nice to see rematch of BU and TCU in 2014.
  8. nashhorn

    nashhorn 5,000+ Posts

    Understand that seasons challenge Pecos but head to head has to count, imho.
  9. OldHippie

    OldHippie 2,500+ Posts

    I liked the suggestion of the Big-12 champion playing the top ranked independent in the country as a championship game.
    • Like Like x 2
  10. nashhorn

    nashhorn 5,000+ Posts

    If only Oldhippie.
  11. Mesohorny

    Mesohorny 1,000+ Posts

    Besides a history of teams meeting a second time in a CG game in the major conferences, I like this because it negates the need to add two city schools (Hou, Lou, Memphis) or Florida Directionals (USF, UCF) which would dilute an arguably weak conference (currently).
  12. Statalyzer

    Statalyzer 10,000+ Posts

    Make$ $en$e from one per$pective, but competitively there's no need for it if you have a round robin.
    • Like Like x 2
  13. Badass

    Badass 2,500+ Posts

    Are you kidding me?

    We played you. We beat you. We have to play you again?

    One true champion? Hello

    Declaring co-champs was the dumbest thing ever with TCU and Baylor

    Now this? Grrr, what Idoit is running this Big 12 circus.

    Hello realignment ... Just blow up this mess!
    • Like Like x 2
  14. easy

    easy 2,500+ Posts

    Agreed what happens if they split, puts us basically in the same situation
  15. easy

    easy 2,500+ Posts

    This game has jerrys world all over it
    • Like Like x 1
  16. LonghornCatholic

    LonghornCatholic Catholic like Sarkisian

    On Longhorn Network :smile1:
    • Like Like x 2
  17. LonghornCatholic

    LonghornCatholic Catholic like Sarkisian

    Not sure if I like it but tend to agree with another poster, beats just adding two crappy teams that will dilute conf.
  18. Godz40acres

    Godz40acres Happy Feller

    Yes, it does. Which is why it should NOT be at neutral site. The team with the best record should get home field advantage due to the fact that they already beat the team they'll have to play in the championship game.

    From a thread last May taken from an ESPN article:

    To mitigate the risk of having a 2-loss team beat an undefeated and knock both out of the CFP and help protect the Big 12’s top playoff contender, I have another suggestion.

    Instead of going back to playing the conference title game at a neutral site, the Big 12 should hold it on the home field of the regular-season champ.

    This would boost the conference in four ways.
    • It would give the Big 12 that 13th game the playoff committee holds so dear.
    • It would offer the Big 12 regular-season winner an opportunity for another quality win.
    • It would diminish the chances that the Big 12 champ would lose.
    • It would provide the Big 12 with a whole lot of national buzz, something the league has lacked in the post-realignment era.
    Imagine Texas traveling to Norman for the first time in almost a century, or Oklahoma running through the tunnel at Darrell K Royal–Texas Memorial Stadium.​
    • Like Like x 1
  19. nashhorn

    nashhorn 5,000+ Posts

    I see the points but remember we are not talking about one division vs the other so we are talking two legitimate top teams playing, not a set up like SEC plays a weaker team or as we most ofter did when Big 12 had divisions. We'll go back to cupcake OOC games as does the SEC for the same reason....long season with only one bye week all year. Just don't like it. And it will be Jerry World - that makes it worse.
  20. Htown77

    Htown77 5,000+ Posts

    Godz40acres, I agree it should be home field if at all.

    That said, my responses below are not about your argument for home field or directed to you, but more a response to why we should not have a title game with fewer than 12 teams at all. Your list is just a good list to organize thoughts around.

    Notre Dame does not need a 13th game. Why do we? We play 9 conference games, the SEC champion plays 9 if you include the SEC title game. Why does 13 matter for the SEC if one game is against Chattanooga? If we have to have a title game, then Notre Dame has to join a damn conference or agree to our independents versus big 12 plan.

    Except they already beat that team, so what difference does it make? If they beat the same team again, what have they proven? If Big 12 #1 Texas beats Big 12 #2 TCU at home on Thanksgiving, do Texas fans really want to pay to see Texas play the exact same game a week later?

    Also, if the same teams play each other in the same stadium back to back weeks, it's really pointless. Again, how is beating the same team twice another quality win?

    Playing at home helps yes. However, playing the game at all means an automatically in undefeated big 12 team could get upset in the rematch and be knocked out of the playoff.

    The Big 12 champ will get knocked out of the playoff more times than this will help (if it helps at all). See Texas-Colorado 2001. Or you can be oklahoma, lose to Kansas State, and still go to the national title (see 2003). Big 12 history shows conference title games had stupid results when we had 12 teams.

    I attended the 1999 and 2005 Big 12 title games. I honestly do not miss it. I decided after 2005, I had no intention of spending the money to attend another one and did not go to the 2009 game. I'd rather spend the $ on a road trip to see Texas play an away game somewhere I have not been before.

    I predict America will not care about the same teams playing each other again. The old Big 12 title game of OU killing Missouri or Colorado did not generate very much buzz. Texas beating Colorado 70-3 did not win Vince the Heisman. The 2009 title game against Nebraska lost Colt the Heisman. The 2003 title game did not even count for anything.

    There seems to be a belief that the title game would have made a difference in 2014 for Baylor or TCU or OU fans believing Special Snowflake would have won the heisman with a title game.

    In 2014, Baylor or TCU playing a rematch would not have unseated Ohio State, Oregon, Florida State or Alabama. The big 12 is underrepresented on the playoff committee and TCU and Baylor don't have the appeal the other teams do. Baylor also had a terrible non conference schedule (the only legitimate point of the committee).

    Also, you cannot rely on what this committee says. If you look at their committee polls week to week, they are nonsensical. The Big 12 is underrepresented. It will be an uphill battle for if there are multiple 1 loss teams every time since we do not get the Notre Dame treatment.

    In 2015, it would not have gotten Special Snowflake the heisman as he simply was not as good as the Stanford running back, the Clemson QB or the Alabama running back.

    Very rarely (if ever) have there been 5 undefeated teams at the end of the season. If a Big 12 team is undefeated, we are in. If a Big 12 team has one loss, we may or may not be in. OU made it this year. If you are worried about being left out with 1 loss, play a better strength of schedule. Do not play a pansy schedule like Baylor.
    • Like Like x 4
    Last edited: Jan 13, 2016
  21. LonghornCatholic

    LonghornCatholic Catholic like Sarkisian

    Can't decide, but it might work. TCU went to OU all banged up so it would have made for a great rematch, and I believe the media would have hyped it.

    I think OSU was second in Big XII, so just speaking hypothetically. A rematch isn't necessarily a terrible thing. IDK.
  22. HornSwoggler

    HornSwoggler 1,000+ Posts

    exactly my thoughts.

    Divided conference (like SEC) where more "GOOD" teams are in one conference has an advantage over a single division conference where top two teams play in CCG. They could end up playing a two or three loss team. CCG would likely be tougher for BigXII assuming it would have two real good teams.

    Definitely like the home field advantage going to the conference's top team.

    It is better than going to two divisions in my opinion.
  23. Htown77

    Htown77 5,000+ Posts

    One final point, no way it can be better than the cotton bowl and state fair. Playing it as a home and home diminishes the game.
    • Like Like x 1
  24. Godz40acres

    Godz40acres Happy Feller

    H, thanks for your response. I agree with everything you said.

    Perhaps I didn't state it clearly enough, but the points in my above post came from an ESPN sports writer back in Apr/May. I thought they had merit back then when there was talk of having a C-game. Now that we are going to have one I wanted to repost them.

    However, I wish the vote had gone the other way for the reasons you stated.
  25. militaryhorn

    militaryhorn Cocky & Relaxed Like Dionysus

    What if team A beats team B by 21+ points the first time and in the "Championship" game they only beat them by 3? Will it hurt them?

    I agree with some above that I think this game will hurt the conference's chances more than it will help.

    Why does team A have to beat team B twice for it to stick?

    Just goes to show that our conference has no balls and caters to the masses. We seemed to make it just fine into the playoff this year without a championship game. Besides, it will be an 8 team playoff within 3 or 4 years from now anyway.
    • Like Like x 1
  26. Statalyzer

    Statalyzer 10,000+ Posts

    That was the real key.

    It happened in both 2004 and 2009.

    True, the Big 12 would be more likely than the current SEC or former Big 12 where b/c of divisions it was often the best team vs the 3rd, 4th, or even 5th best team. But since it doesn't count ooc games (probably rightly, but still), you could still end up with, say, an 11-1 team playing a 9-3 team while a 10-2 team that beat said 9-3 team watches at home.
  27. Htown77

    Htown77 5,000+ Posts

    Sorry Stat. This is my bad. I meant to say 5 undefeated power conference teams (thought it in my head, but did not write it). An undefeated non power 5 team will almost certainly get left out.

    The committee had U of H at #18. #18!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! U of H won a conference title game over a ranked team. U of H beat 3 ranked teams. U of H's only loss was on the road without their starting QB. Remember when the committee said it would take injuries into account? Ha!

    I honestly am not certain the committee (due to its makeup) would EVER allow a non power 5 team or independent into the playoff. As discussed in another thread, an undefeated U of H next year could quite possibly be the strongest case for an undefeated non power 5 team. If they go undefeated, it will be an interesting test case. I think they are out no matter what if there are 4 undefeated power 5 teams, and the test case will be can they get in over any 1 loss power 5 teams.

    Anyway, correct me if I am wrong, the undefeated teams in 2004 and 2009 were as follows:
    Power Conference:
    Power Non Conference:
    Boise State

    Something tells me with the committee, Texas gets in the playoff instead of Boise or Utah. Texas and California both finished ahead of Utah and Boise in the BCS and Texas finished higher than California (I think Cal was upset or something about this, I cannot recall. :smile1::hookem:)

    Also of note, Auburn, the SEC Champ, was not awarded any share of the national title. It will be nice when college football becomes sane again and the SEC myth is dead.

    Power Conference:
    Non Power Conference:
    Boise State

    Under the BCS standings, TCU was in the top 4 and would have made it into the playoff. Boise would have been left out at #6. Florida finished #5. That would have been a great test case year for the committee.

    I should also note there used to be 6 BCS conference and now we have a power 5. One less conference means the likelihood of undefeated teams is now less than what it was (especially since the conference that is gone is the Big East).
    Last edited: Jan 14, 2016
  28. Statalyzer

    Statalyzer 10,000+ Posts

    Fine print: Only if your program is historically prestigious.
    • Like Like x 3
  29. 56 Bells

    56 Bells 500+ Posts

    Not really....things change as the season progresses....some teams get much better (Look at Stanford this year), others lose their star players and become weaker for the bowls and playoffs.
    LOVE the idea of 'home field advantage' for: 1.) either the team that is the undisputed champion of the league vs the runner-up....OR in case of a tie in the standings, 2.) the winner of the head-to-head match-up from the regular season would be great for Austin to have a championship game at DKR!

    It would negate the impression, currently...nationally, that the Big XII is a weaker/smaller conference because they don't have a championship game.
    I'm all for it!!!.....More great exposure at the right time......for the conference.
  30. 56 Bells

    56 Bells 500+ Posts

    If the game is played at a neutral site, will end up in Okie City or Kansas City, and we're screwed.......just like the dang basketball tourney, the baseball tourney, the softball tourney.....etc.....Okie City is a 'home game' for ou......K.C. is a home game for Kansas State, Iowa State, Kansas, etc. "Home and home" would not diminish the game whatsoever, in my opinion. Don't open the door for the okies to always get home field advantage as they now do in the above-listed sports. It's just WRONG!
    • Like Like x 1

Share This Page