http://m.si.com/1810908/big-12-delaying-...itle-game/

When they start getting snubbed out of the 4th seed, then they will realize how asinine it was to drop a game from the schedule. There is no way the committee is going to reward a team that plays one less game than everyone else.

(02-21-2013 08:25 AM)RUScarlets Wrote:  When they start getting snubbed out of the 4th seed, then they will realize how asinine it was to drop a game from the schedule. There is no way the committee is going to reward a team that plays one less game than everyone else.

They are expanding

(02-21-2013 08:44 AM)pablowow Wrote:  

(02-21-2013 08:25 AM)RUScarlets Wrote:  When they start getting snubbed out of the 4th seed, then they will realize how asinine it was to drop a game from the schedule. There is no way the committee is going to reward a team that plays one less game than everyone else.

They are expanding

Cincy and BYU on speed Dial

My cold meds told me they are ready to add USF and UCF for 1/2 shares. 10 mil each. the Champ game will cover the cost.

can't pursuade any big fish to join yet

(02-21-2013 08:46 AM)TexanMark Wrote:  

(02-21-2013 08:44 AM)pablowow Wrote:  

(02-21-2013 08:25 AM)RUScarlets Wrote:  When they start getting snubbed out of the 4th seed, then they will realize how asinine it was to drop a game from the schedule. There is no way the committee is going to reward a team that plays one less game than everyone else.

They are expanding

Cincy and BYU on speed Dial

If they wouldn't take UL why would they suddenly take Cincy?

(02-21-2013 10:14 AM)OldGoldnBlue Wrote:  

(02-21-2013 08:46 AM)TexanMark Wrote:  

(02-21-2013 08:44 AM)pablowow Wrote:  

(02-21-2013 08:25 AM)RUScarlets Wrote:  When they start getting snubbed out of the 4th seed, then they will realize how asinine it was to drop a game from the schedule. There is no way the committee is going to reward a team that plays one less game than everyone else.

They are expanding

Cincy and BYU on speed Dial

If they wouldn't take UL why would they suddenly take Cincy?

Exactly. If Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma St, Texas Tech, West Virginia etc go 12-0 as a member of the Big 12, they won't be left out of the NC game. I see no reason to add schools that bring no value so the Big 12 can have a CCG.

(02-21-2013 10:14 AM)OldGoldnBlue Wrote:  

(02-21-2013 08:46 AM)TexanMark Wrote:  

(02-21-2013 08:44 AM)pablowow Wrote:  

(02-21-2013 08:25 AM)RUScarlets Wrote:  When they start getting snubbed out of the 4th seed, then they will realize how asinine it was to drop a game from the schedule. There is no way the committee is going to reward a team that plays one less game than everyone else.

They are expanding

Cincy and BYU on speed Dial

If they wouldn't take UL why would they suddenly take Cincy?

It was TIC...but the B12 is kinda boxed in. They can't expand until UT sez so and viable candidates are available.

I thought they should've taken UL, Cincy and WVU as a gang of three though...too late now.

My guess is that they don't have the votes to get the proposal approved.

I'm not a fan of Bowlsby...at all.

(02-21-2013 08:25 AM)RUScarlets Wrote:  When they start getting snubbed out of the 4th seed, then they will realize how asinine it was to drop a game from the schedule. There is no way the committee is going to reward a team that plays one less game than everyone else.

It may be a factor, but it is obviously exaggerated. The committee isn't going to snub them simply because they played one game less.

Obviously, an undefeated 12-0 Big 12 champ is in a playoff now matter what. A one loss team is going to have work to do, just like the one loss teams from every other conference will face. Going to depend on the resume. That's why Bowlsby is stressing nonconference action and alliances. An 11-1 Big 12 champ with a strong nonconference schedule will be fine, even with one less game. An 11-1 Big 12 champ with a typical Bill Snyder nonconference schedule will be in trouble.

The push wouldn't matter anyway...its not going to be changed.

I'm sure the Big 12 understands basic math (although their conference name doesn't seem to indicate such). The reason for the "12" team champ rule is because with 12 teams not everyone can play each other...i.e...the need for a champ game to decide the title. With 10 teams everyone can play everyone so there is no need for a champ game.

If you don't believe me that it won't be changed, think about the fact that the Big Ten sat for like 20 years with 11 members and no champ game. Even though TV would have paid a pretty penny for it. I don't recall the Big Ten talking about changing a rule for their benefit....it's just not going to happen when other conferences have added members for the express purpose of getting that game and the additional revenue. The MWC will be at 12 now and the Big East is moving toward it by 2015.

nBE going to 12 with who? Navy and Tulsa? That's bringing in a ****load of money for sure.

I agree there is no value out there, but when you are the only power conference without a CCG, you are going to get snubbed. K-State finished 5th. Oregon jumped them without even playing in their own CCG. That's because K-State got blown out against Baylor, but it was enough despite beating all the good teams in the Big 12.

Eventually they are going to need to play a CCG. You can look at BYU and AFA as football only members. But you probably look East. Since they can't directly poach from the ACC as it is now, you probably have to look at Memphis, Houston, Tulane, UC... clubs like that. I think Fla is out of reach. That's a pretty bad crop to choose from.

Overall I think it is a lost cause and the conference will eventually implode to the Pac 12 and SEC. Maybe solid for another 10-12 years but that's not a lot of time relatively speaking.

(02-21-2013 10:58 AM)OldGoldnBlue Wrote:  I'm not a fan of Bowlsby...at all.

Why? What has he done so far to alienate anyone?

(02-21-2013 11:40 AM)HP-TBDPITL Wrote:  The push wouldn't matter anyway...its not going to be changed.

I'm sure the Big 12 understands basic math (although their conference name doesn't seem to indicate such). The reason for the "12" team champ rule is because with 12 teams not everyone can play each other...i.e...the need for a champ game to decide the title. With 10 teams everyone can play everyone so there is no need for a champ game.

If you don't believe me that it won't be changed, think about the fact that the Big Ten sat for like 20 years with 11 members and no champ game. Even though TV would have paid a pretty penny for it. I don't recall the Big Ten talking about changing a rule for their benefit....it's just not going to happen when other conferences have added members for the express purpose of getting that game and the additional revenue. The MWC will be at 12 now and the Big East is moving toward it by 2015.

I think you are making some assumptions here. There is a growing sentiment of deregulating the control of the NCAA on certain conference activities. That is where this is coming from.

Taking a step back, why would other conferences care if a league with 10 members hosts a championship game? Heck, I've heard the argument that not having a champ game is an advantage since it is one less chance a team can get upset and fall out of the top 2 or 4. Also, that one carrot of expansion (the money from hosting a champ game) would no longer be in play, which could add some stability on the expansion front.

Seems to me, there may be more motivation to allow the rule to be changed than there is to prevent it.

Back to the article (changing th esubjest), if I read the article correctly it doesn't say the Big 12 still won't push for the rule change, only that it won't have a championship game. The headline is kinda deceptive.

(02-21-2013 11:51 AM)RUScarlets Wrote:  nBE going to 12 with who? Navy and Tulsa? That's bringing in a ****load of money for sure.

I agree there is no value out there, but when you are the only power conference without a CCG, you are going to get snubbed. K-State finished 5th. Oregon jumped them without even playing in their own CCG. That's because K-State got blown out against Baylor, but it was enough despite beating all the good teams in the Big 12.

Eventually they are going to need to play a CCG. You can look at BYU and AFA as football only members. But you probably look East. Since they can't directly poach from the ACC as it is now, you probably have to look at Memphis, Houston, Tulane, UC... clubs like that. I think Fla is out of reach. That's a pretty bad crop to choose from.

Overall I think it is a lost cause and the conference will eventually implode to the Pac 12 and SEC. Maybe solid for another 10-12 years but that's not a lot of time relatively speaking.

Doesn't that (Oregon getting into the top 4) fly in the face of your argument about the necessity of a champ game to get into the top 4? Two years ago Alabama was in the top 2 without a champ game.

Bottom line, a committee is going to look at the big picture. Nonconference action, conference strength, whether the team is a champ, how soon the last lost was, wins over top teams, etc. Same stuff we hear about with the B-ball committee. Maybe in two closely approximated teams, that thirteenth game is the difference. But I doubt it will often be the major deciding factor. Heck, if you are in the 3-5 range and you lose that 13th game, it most certainly will be a deciding factor...

(02-21-2013 10:19 AM)jml2010 Wrote:  

(02-21-2013 10:14 AM)OldGoldnBlue Wrote:  

(02-21-2013 08:46 AM)TexanMark Wrote:  

(02-21-2013 08:44 AM)pablowow Wrote:  

(02-21-2013 08:25 AM)RUScarlets Wrote:  When they start getting snubbed out of the 4th seed, then they will realize how asinine it was to drop a game from the schedule. There is no way the committee is going to reward a team that plays one less game than everyone else.

They are expanding

Cincy and BYU on speed Dial

If they wouldn't take UL why would they suddenly take Cincy?

Exactly. If Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma St, Texas Tech, West Virginia etc go 12-0 as a member of the Big 12, they won't be left out of the NC game. I see no reason to add schools that bring no value so the Big 12 can have a CCG.

They already have!

Bowlsby wants the "option" to have a championship game with 10 teams....does not mean they will. He has said before, even if the Big12 expanded to 11 or 12 teams they would not necessarily have a CCG. It appears what he wants is the freedom to have a CCG if a situation develops like the Big12 had last year when KSU and OU tied for the championship.

As for being penalized for not having a CCG.....the fact the Big12 plays 9 conference games rather than the usual 8 and a cup cake, will help their strength of schedule in the selection process and that may offset no CCG

(02-21-2013 12:08 PM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote:  Taking a step back, why would other conferences care if a league with 10 members hosts a championship game? Heck, I've heard the argument that not having a champ game is an advantage since it is one less chance a team can get upset and fall out of the top 2 or 4.

It is an advantage if your top team is undefeated... an undefeated team from a top league will be in the playoff regardless, so no need to risk a loss in a 13th game against a good opponent.

If the playoff money is good enough, the SEC might even think about dumping its conference title game and just designating "SEC East champions" and "SEC West champions". If the current reputation of the SEC holds, then a one-loss SEC division champ has an excellent chance of being in a playoff and the SEC has an even better chance of placing two teams in the playoff. Why saddle one of those division champs with an extra loss by playing a conference title game?