I don't mind telling you that I'm very much in favor of expansion (only with quality programs) and a championship game. Your thoughts?
This post was edited on 10/23 9:34 AM by Vernon
This post was edited on 10/23 9:34 AM by Vernon
POLL: Do you want to see a Big 12 championship game?
- Thread starter Vernon
- Start date
For what?
The previous commissioner expressed it best when he said they had traveled that road and found it wasn't paved with gold after all. Besides which, this crap of avoiding certain teams in the regular season in order to get to some nebulous "Championship Game" is just that -- CRAP. People keep wailing that they want to see the national championship decided on the field. Why should conference championships be any different? You shouldn't be allowed to call yourself "champion" if you haven't played every team in the league and won more games than anyone else.
The previous commissioner expressed it best when he said they had traveled that road and found it wasn't paved with gold after all. Besides which, this crap of avoiding certain teams in the regular season in order to get to some nebulous "Championship Game" is just that -- CRAP. People keep wailing that they want to see the national championship decided on the field. Why should conference championships be any different? You shouldn't be allowed to call yourself "champion" if you haven't played every team in the league and won more games than anyone else.
With a 4 team playoff coming in 2 years (and an 8 team playoff a few years after that), why expand and decrease our odds of winning the conference? The B12 champ WILL be in the playoff at 11-1 or 12-0 and after it goes to 8 teams even 10-2 will probably be good enough.
Htgn. Eer .. that is a pro ... the associated con is that teams from the other division would only have to come here once every 4 years which would be bad if Texas and Oklahoma were in the other division.
Hell, no...!
Conference "championship" games are a sham. The participants are often decided by chance, i.e. which team got lucky and drew the weaker teams that year in the cross-division portion of the schedule.
The only real conference championship is a full round-robin schedule like we played in the Big East and like we play now in the Big 12. Any other format is an artifice.
Conference "championship" games are a sham. The participants are often decided by chance, i.e. which team got lucky and drew the weaker teams that year in the cross-division portion of the schedule.
The only real conference championship is a full round-robin schedule like we played in the Big East and like we play now in the Big 12. Any other format is an artifice.
I am a bit torn on this one... I think expansion is the only way to ensure the conference's survival at this level long term (it could happen without it, but i won't feel real comfortable in 13 years if it hasn't happened). On the flip side I hated the first 15 years of the Big 12 scheduling wise. Only seeing Nebraska once every four years sucked. It ended the best rivalry of the Big 8. I never saw the point of having Texas and Nebraska in the same conference if they could go two years without seeing each other. OSU drew Kansas State and Nebraska in the same years, so when those two programs were strong in the late 90's and early last decade the schedule dictated how good a bowl Les Miles' teams could expect to reach. The other two years were much easier. Who doesn't want to play Oklahoma and Texas every year? Who doesn't like the potential rivalries West Virginia could build with Texas Tech, Oklahoma State, Kansas State, Baylor, etc happening every year? This year will be the first since 1998 that Oklahoma State and Kansas State will face each other a third year in a row. Now it feels like what they do has some baring on my team each week.
As to the question in the thread title... In 15 years I think we saw 4 good championship games. We saw the conference's two best teams matched up head to head only one time in that game (clear #1 and #2 that is). I'm not sure we got many #1 vs #3 matchups.
As to the question in the thread title... In 15 years I think we saw 4 good championship games. We saw the conference's two best teams matched up head to head only one time in that game (clear #1 and #2 that is). I'm not sure we got many #1 vs #3 matchups.
In order to have a CCG, the Big12 would have to add two teams, and there are no two teams left worth adding now that FSU and Clemson are locked in the ACC, ND is ACC bound, and BYU is too far west now that WVU is in. Plus each school gets more $$ with 10 teams.
IF the Big12 were to expand it would most likely be a school in either the South or the Midwest, and they would have to bring some real clout with them like national championship trophies in their trophy case or a place to recruit from i.e. the state of Florida. I don't see it happening and don't think the Big12 member schools would see enough of a benefit to make that happen.
IF the Big12 were to expand it would most likely be a school in either the South or the Midwest, and they would have to bring some real clout with them like national championship trophies in their trophy case or a place to recruit from i.e. the state of Florida. I don't see it happening and don't think the Big12 member schools would see enough of a benefit to make that happen.
If we added two teams from the East how do we do so in a way that avoids the cluster the North Division was since 2003? Kansas, Kansas State and Iowa State simply aren't in the same place as programs as any of the six schools south of them. It was a drain on all of the programs in the conference when there was such a gap between the two divisions. Even Nebraska felt it. There was not as much pressure to put winners on the field in the North, and they all basically allowed themselves to get fat and happy. There has to be a program in the North/East/whatever division that pushes West Virginia other than Kansas State because Snyder isn't getting any younger and their entire history without him doesn't inspire much confidence.
The question is not this simple...
BUT...Let's remember, it also about killed the Big 12 last time.
Divisional play will ABSOLUTELY SUCK. Unbalanced schedules, no guaranteed UT or OU at home each season. No matter what you do, some programs get screwed over.
I love round-robin play and if all the conferences could go back to that today, they probably would. It differentiates the Big12 and with our depth and 9-game conference schedule, gives us more regular-season marquee matchups - which is nice.
The issue is "with quality programs"...
FSU - Yes
Clemson - Yes
Maryland - Maybe
Lousivlle - Maybe...with FSU
BYU - Don't think so
Rutgers - No
Cincinnati - Uh, no
USF - IF we don't eventually get FSU, we might have to look hard - a Florida presence would help WVU
Let's face it... if we can't get FSU, we should stay at 10 imo...
I think a Championship game would be exciting, and give us a little more juice to play for during the season - based upon divisional play. And of course it would drive revenue.
BUT...Let's remember, it also about killed the Big 12 last time.
Divisional play will ABSOLUTELY SUCK. Unbalanced schedules, no guaranteed UT or OU at home each season. No matter what you do, some programs get screwed over.
I love round-robin play and if all the conferences could go back to that today, they probably would. It differentiates the Big12 and with our depth and 9-game conference schedule, gives us more regular-season marquee matchups - which is nice.
The issue is "with quality programs"...
FSU - Yes
Clemson - Yes
Maryland - Maybe
Lousivlle - Maybe...with FSU
BYU - Don't think so
Rutgers - No
Cincinnati - Uh, no
USF - IF we don't eventually get FSU, we might have to look hard - a Florida presence would help WVU
Let's face it... if we can't get FSU, we should stay at 10 imo...
Re: Hell, no...!
I don't think it ever happened to anyone in the South, but that's because from 2004-2010 there was never more than one team in the North that could beat two teams from the South.
The year Kansas went to the Orange Bowl they didn't play Texas, Oklahoma or Texas Tech. They were by far the best three teams in the South that year. I believe @ 7-6 Oklahoma State was their best conference win that season. Had they pulled off that win against Missouri or had your Raiders beat Missouri we'd have sent Kansas to the championship game despite missing 3 or the top 4 teams in the conference during regular season play that year.
I don't think it ever happened to anyone in the South, but that's because from 2004-2010 there was never more than one team in the North that could beat two teams from the South.
Re: Hell, no...!
It happened in:
1997: Texas A&M 6-2, Texas Tech 5-3. Tech beat A&M that year but lost to 13-0 Nebraska and 11-1 Kansas State while A&M played 5-6 Colorado, 1-10 Iowa State and 11-1 Kansas State from the North.
1998: Texas A&M 7-1, Texas 6-2. Texas beat A&M that year, but lost to 11-2 Kansas State. Both teams beat 9-4 Nebraska.
2001: Texas 7-1, Oklahoma 6-2. OU beat Texas that year, but lost at 11-2 Nebraska (ranked #1 at the time) and later to OSU. Texas did not play Nebraska, OU did not play 10-3 Colorado.
2002: Texas Tech went 4-1 in the South, but 5-3 in conference play, losing to both 9-5 Colorado (North champs that year) and 7-7 Iowa State (3rd in the North). OU won the South in a tie break with 6-2 Texas. OU did not play Colorado or Iowa State.
2005: Colorado 5-3, Nebraska 4-4. Iowa State and Missouri were also 4-4 that year. Nebraska beat Colorado, and both teams were 3-2 in the division. Nebraska lost to 8-4 Oklahoma and 9-3 Texas Tech. Colorado beat 4-7 Oklahoma State and 5-6 Baylor.
I got curious...
It happened in:
1997: Texas A&M 6-2, Texas Tech 5-3. Tech beat A&M that year but lost to 13-0 Nebraska and 11-1 Kansas State while A&M played 5-6 Colorado, 1-10 Iowa State and 11-1 Kansas State from the North.
1998: Texas A&M 7-1, Texas 6-2. Texas beat A&M that year, but lost to 11-2 Kansas State. Both teams beat 9-4 Nebraska.
2001: Texas 7-1, Oklahoma 6-2. OU beat Texas that year, but lost at 11-2 Nebraska (ranked #1 at the time) and later to OSU. Texas did not play Nebraska, OU did not play 10-3 Colorado.
2002: Texas Tech went 4-1 in the South, but 5-3 in conference play, losing to both 9-5 Colorado (North champs that year) and 7-7 Iowa State (3rd in the North). OU won the South in a tie break with 6-2 Texas. OU did not play Colorado or Iowa State.
2005: Colorado 5-3, Nebraska 4-4. Iowa State and Missouri were also 4-4 that year. Nebraska beat Colorado, and both teams were 3-2 in the division. Nebraska lost to 8-4 Oklahoma and 9-3 Texas Tech. Colorado beat 4-7 Oklahoma State and 5-6 Baylor.
The ever so exciting championship games...
1996 - Texas 37, Nebraska 27. This loss cost Nebraska a potential title birth and Florida and Florida State had a rematch. Nebraska finished the year 11-2, Texas 8-5.
1997 - Nebraska 54, Texas A&M 15. Nebraska coasted past 9-4 Texas A&M on the way to a national title.
1998 - Texas A&M 36, Kansas State 33 in 2OT. This game cost Kansas State a shot at the championship game. They were #2 and 11-0. They finished 11-2, Texas A&M got drilled in the Sugar Bowl and finished 11-3.
1999 - Nebraska 23, Texas 6. Nebraska avenged their previous loss to Texas, which brought us the whole "Nebraska hurt itself by beating Texas." debacle. Nebraska finished just outside the top two in the BCS and then drilled Virginia Tech. Texas finished the year 9-5, Nebraska 12-1.
2000 - Oklahoma 27, Kansas State 24. This was the second meeting between the two teams, both OU wins, both outstanding games. OU won the national title and went 13-0 that year. Kansas State finished 11-3.
2001 - Colorado 39, Texas 37. Colorado avenged their previous loss to Texas, which kept Texas out of the national championship game, but no worries because Nebraska got in instead.
2002 - Oklahoma 29, Colorado 7. This is when things got fun... Colorado limped into conference play 0-4 or 1-3 that year and then went 7-1 in Big 12 play, upsetting 11-2 Kansas State in their path to the title game. OU beat them handily.
2003 - Kansas State 35, Oklahoma 7. Strangely enough OU still got to play in the championship game after this...
2004 - Oklahoma 42, Colorado 3. Colorado "earned" the right to play in this game by going 4-4 in Big 12 play, but 4-1 in the North Division. This was such a great year for balance that the best five teams in the Big 12 all played in the South. How do I know this? Because the South went 15-3 against the North. The North's 3 wins... All against Baylor.
2005 - Texas 70, Colorado 3. Once again Colorado was probably no better than the 4th or 5th best team in the conference. they finished that year 7-6. Texas won the national championship.
2006 - Oklahoma 21, Nebraska 7. This game was never really as close as that looks.
2007 - Oklahoma 38, Missouri 17. This was a strange year for the Big 12. Everyone in it knew Texas and Oklahoma were the two best teams, but the South beat itself up while Missouri and Kansas were ranked #1 and #2 in the country by the final week of the season. OU beat Missouri by 10 in the regular season (their only loss) and then crushed them here. Kansas got to go to the Orangle Bowl... Mostly because they didn't play OU, Texas or Texas Tech. The one good team they did play, Missouri, they lost to.
2008 - Oklahoma 62, Missouri 21. Missouri got to play in the conference title game while 11-2 Texas Tech and 12-1 Texas, who tied for the South with OU, got to stay home. Missouri was the 5th best team in the Big 12 in 2008 (they also lost to 9-4 OSU).
2009 - Texas 13, Nebraska 12. This was a great game, except no one in Nebraska knows how long a second takes and they took their ball and left two years later, still pissed about this.
2010 - Oklahoma 23, Nebraska 20. Nebraska must have scored late in this one, because I don't remember it being particularly close. Martinez was all gimpy by this point of the season so Nebraska was only fun to watch when the other team had the ball.
So, 1996, 1998, 2000, 2001, 2009 and 2010 were good games. Of course 96, 98, 01 (and 07) cost the conference a birth in the championship game.
1997, 1999, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008... All lopsided football games. Those 7 straight were really fun, totally worth it.
1996 - Texas 37, Nebraska 27. This loss cost Nebraska a potential title birth and Florida and Florida State had a rematch. Nebraska finished the year 11-2, Texas 8-5.
1997 - Nebraska 54, Texas A&M 15. Nebraska coasted past 9-4 Texas A&M on the way to a national title.
1998 - Texas A&M 36, Kansas State 33 in 2OT. This game cost Kansas State a shot at the championship game. They were #2 and 11-0. They finished 11-2, Texas A&M got drilled in the Sugar Bowl and finished 11-3.
1999 - Nebraska 23, Texas 6. Nebraska avenged their previous loss to Texas, which brought us the whole "Nebraska hurt itself by beating Texas." debacle. Nebraska finished just outside the top two in the BCS and then drilled Virginia Tech. Texas finished the year 9-5, Nebraska 12-1.
2000 - Oklahoma 27, Kansas State 24. This was the second meeting between the two teams, both OU wins, both outstanding games. OU won the national title and went 13-0 that year. Kansas State finished 11-3.
2001 - Colorado 39, Texas 37. Colorado avenged their previous loss to Texas, which kept Texas out of the national championship game, but no worries because Nebraska got in instead.
2002 - Oklahoma 29, Colorado 7. This is when things got fun... Colorado limped into conference play 0-4 or 1-3 that year and then went 7-1 in Big 12 play, upsetting 11-2 Kansas State in their path to the title game. OU beat them handily.
2003 - Kansas State 35, Oklahoma 7. Strangely enough OU still got to play in the championship game after this...
2004 - Oklahoma 42, Colorado 3. Colorado "earned" the right to play in this game by going 4-4 in Big 12 play, but 4-1 in the North Division. This was such a great year for balance that the best five teams in the Big 12 all played in the South. How do I know this? Because the South went 15-3 against the North. The North's 3 wins... All against Baylor.
2005 - Texas 70, Colorado 3. Once again Colorado was probably no better than the 4th or 5th best team in the conference. they finished that year 7-6. Texas won the national championship.
2006 - Oklahoma 21, Nebraska 7. This game was never really as close as that looks.
2007 - Oklahoma 38, Missouri 17. This was a strange year for the Big 12. Everyone in it knew Texas and Oklahoma were the two best teams, but the South beat itself up while Missouri and Kansas were ranked #1 and #2 in the country by the final week of the season. OU beat Missouri by 10 in the regular season (their only loss) and then crushed them here. Kansas got to go to the Orangle Bowl... Mostly because they didn't play OU, Texas or Texas Tech. The one good team they did play, Missouri, they lost to.
2008 - Oklahoma 62, Missouri 21. Missouri got to play in the conference title game while 11-2 Texas Tech and 12-1 Texas, who tied for the South with OU, got to stay home. Missouri was the 5th best team in the Big 12 in 2008 (they also lost to 9-4 OSU).
2009 - Texas 13, Nebraska 12. This was a great game, except no one in Nebraska knows how long a second takes and they took their ball and left two years later, still pissed about this.
2010 - Oklahoma 23, Nebraska 20. Nebraska must have scored late in this one, because I don't remember it being particularly close. Martinez was all gimpy by this point of the season so Nebraska was only fun to watch when the other team had the ball.
So, 1996, 1998, 2000, 2001, 2009 and 2010 were good games. Of course 96, 98, 01 (and 07) cost the conference a birth in the championship game.
1997, 1999, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008... All lopsided football games. Those 7 straight were really fun, totally worth it.
I agree with you Vernon, on both counts (expansion and a championship game). Either get the Big XII conference back up to 12 teams or change the name.
What I want and what we need are eastern partners. We already seen the impact of back to back travel to Texas. Having closer teams will greatly help with travel. I also think without them our recruiting will suffer.
With this said you can't expand and have TexAss and OU in the same division. It just does not work
With this said you can't expand and have TexAss and OU in the same division. It just does not work
We won't be able to separate Texas and Oklahoma. There are too many obstacles. What do you do with Oklahoma State? They'll balk at leaving Texas' division as well for recruiting reasons, and Oklahoma can't be separated from both of its rivals. It can't be separated from just one of them without necessitating permanent cross-division rivalry games. Other than Oklahoma State-Texas Tech/Baylor/TCU what are the other attractive permanent cross-division rivalries? Iowa State-Baylor isn't really going to accomplish much. Never mind the part where those two schools have nearly all the clout between them and don't want to play in different divisions...
They're place in the same division was never as big of a problem for the conference as it may seem from the outside. The bigger issues, by far, were the collapse of Nebraska and Colorado and Missouri's inability to ever become a permanent power. Bill Snyder's retirement just made it that much worse, and probably will again when he retires for good. When Nebraska was strong there was enough balance between the divisions. In fact, for the first five or so years the North dominated the South until Stoops and Brown were established.
What is the NCAA's reasoning behind requiring a conference to have 12 teams to be eligible to have a conference championship game? Why can't you have one if you have 10 teams? I get that with 12 you can split in 2 divisions, etc., etc., but it makes no sense to me. IMO, you should be allow to have a championship game no matter how many teams you have. Is there a reasonable explanation or did the NCAA make this rule to encourage conference expansion?
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
A friend said he heard yesterday at the Spring game that............
- Latest: bobbyboucheeer
-
