TCU NOT Big XII (co) champion

[RubyClone]

Provided Baylor wins tonight.

Thoughts? I only bring it up because I know this hasn't been discussed ad nausem all week.... :wink:

Full disclosure - hate TCU, admire Briles, not much a Baylor fan. I do feel that TCU got somewhat screwed in the Baylor game, but everyone does about every game with Big XII refs...

But all year, commerical after commercial, the Big XII has been touting the ONE TRUE CHAMPION angle.

So here we are. In about any other circumstance - the head to head would break the tie.

I understand it's all politics to cover bases for the playoffs. Still - don't like it.

 

[cmjh10]

I do find it hilarious that the Big 12 isnt claiming one true champion after using that as their motto all season.

 

[Ciclone]

To me, it's pretty simple and the way all conferences have operated in this format. There isn't a tie-breaker because there isn't a next step for conference play.

 

[CyStalker]

IMO, KSU wins tonight. They have been disrespected all week, they have father time as their coach and BU will probably play Petty who I'm guessing has no business being on the field this week.

 

[RubyClone]

The Big12Sports.com article on tie breaks. Granted -it's not up to them. I'm speaking more about the trophy, title, etc.

The following procedure will determine the Big 12 Conference representative to the Sugar Bowl (or alternate College Football Playoff game when the Sugar Bowl is a semifinal) in the event of a first-place or alternate place tie (for the avoidance of doubt, only Conference records will be used throughout the process):

1. If two teams are tied, the winner of the game between the two tied teams shall be the representative.

http://www.big12sports.com/ViewArticle.dbml?ATCLID=1546006

 

[alarson]

IMO, KSU wins tonight. They have been disrespected all week, they have father time as their coach and BU will probably play Petty who I'm guessing has no business being on the field this week.

Yeah, something about this game just seems like the type of game KSU would win.

 

[Ciclone]

Yeah, something about this game just seems like the type of game KSU would win.

I agree with you guys on KSU. Should be quite a game.

 

[RubyClone]

Yeah, something about this game just seems like the type of game KSU would win.

In which case I would say TCU is the lone champ.

And I agree with CiClone. Really happy my wife has a bachelorette party tonight (can't believe I'm saying that, but..). Turkey and TV for me tonight....

BEST ANNIVERSARY EVER!!!

 

[Farnsworth]

I do find it hilarious that the Big 12 isnt claiming one true champion after using that as their motto all season.

ya allowing that commercial to play all game long is semi-embarrassing.

 

[ArgentCy]

That was a great Bowlsby media push, whoops guess we hadn't considered the possibility of a tie. Umm well, we'll just let the comittee decide what to do with co-champs.

 

[IAStubborn]

Provided Baylor wins tonight.

Thoughts? I only bring it up because I know this hasn't been discussed ad nausem all week.... :wink:

Full disclosure - hate TCU, admire Briles, not much a Baylor fan. I do feel that TCU got somewhat screwed in the Baylor game, but everyone does about every game with Big XII refs...

But all year, commerical after commercial, the Big XII has been touting the ONE TRUE CHAMPION angle.

So here we are. In about any other circumstance - the head to head would break the tie.

I understand it's all politics to cover bases for the playoffs. Still - don't like it.

But those are the rules. We crown co champs. Tie breakers are only used for seeding for conference tournaments or sugar bowl designation (not specific to sport). We don't have one true champion anymore ( which is the irony of our media campaign but we do have the truest standings as everyone plays the same schedule). Except BB we have one true champion as the winner of the tournament that would be Iowa State

 

[IAStubborn]

That was a great Bowlsby media push, whoops guess we hadn't considered the possibility of a tie. Umm well, we'll just let the comittee decide what to do with co-champs.

If k state wins they are cochamps instead of Baylor either way we don't have a true champ.

 

[RubyClone]

But those are the rules. We crown co champs. Tie breakers are only used for seeding for conference tournaments (not specific to sport). We don't have one true champion anymore ( which is the irony of our media campaign but we do have the truest standings as everyone plays the same schedule). Except BB we have one true champion as the winner of the tournament that would be Iowa State

That's kinda my point though Everyone plays the same games, there will always be a head to head. Just like the campaign touts. Not like in 200(4?) when we co-champs in the north (I think that was rather BS too, as there was the head to head that sent (Mizzou?) to the champ game.

I do have a hard time reconciling the WVU thing - but there IS the head to head still. (Again presuming it's Baylor)

 

[IAStubborn]

The Big12Sports.com article on tie breaks. Granted -it's not up to them. I'm speaking more about the trophy, title, etc.



http://www.big12sports.com/ViewArticle.dbml?ATCLID=1546006

That is just for the representative to the sugar bowl (or alternative bowl) not title.

 

[IAStubborn]

That's kinda my point though Everyone plays the same games, there will always be a head to head. Just like the campaign touts. Not like in 200(4?) when we co-champs in the north (I think that was rather BS too, as there was the head to head that sent (Mizzou?) to the champ game.

I do have a hard time reconciling the WVU thing - but there IS the head to head still. (Again presuming it's Baylor)

What about 3 way ties with 3 teams with one loss imagine this scenario that almost happened -if Baylor didn't lose to WVU and kstate didn't lose to auburn.... And tonight 1 loss kstate beats undefeated Baylor leaving us with three 11-1 cochamps that all have a win over each other..... One true champ? And for those that think a championship game would work without expansion who would play in that game amongst those 3? Coin flip?

 

[Wesley]

The slogan blown up the first year it is used. The second place B12 team goes to the BCS leaving Baylor at home. LOL.

 

[CyFan61]

People (especially BU fans) keep yelling about the head-to-head.

Guess what? Baylor lost by 14 to West Virginia.

They have nothing to complain about.

"One True Champion" was a stupid slogan for the conference, but the Big 12 co-champions will be TCU and the winner of KSU @ BU tonight. That's the best way to do it.

 

[Wesley]

They need to can the slogan like Hope and Change.

 

[tonyfil]

I get that there is an issue with awarding co-champs. But the conf. does have a tie-breaker rule for placing teams in the Sugar Bowl (Champions Bown v. SEC). It is decided by the head-to-head play. The CFP is independent of rules and even if the Big 12 declares Baylor the Big 12 Champ - it doesn't change anything.

Had FSU not been undefeated - I think the conversation could easily shift to "TCU and Baylor are obvious choices into the playoff" and there wouldn't be all this angst. Another issue is that in all likelihood, TCU and Baylor would be in the same division.

 

[Stormin]

Trophy from 2004 says that Iowa State was Champions of the Big XII North Division.

From Wiki:

Note: While the team playing in the championship game is popularly regarded as the divisional champion, the Big 12 does officially recognize co-champions in football, just like it does in other sports. As a result, the following teams are also recognized as champions by the Big 12:North Co-Champions: Kansas State (1999), Nebraska (2000, 2001, 2008), Iowa State (2004), Kansas (2007), Missouri (2010)
South Co-Champions: Texas (2002, 2008), Texas Tech (2008), Oklahoma State (2010), Texas A&M (2010) [SUP][12][/SUP]