I don't understand the argument that the conference messed up. There is no way Baylor was going to jump into there playoff. TCU was in a position to get in so the conference didn't want to do anything to hurt that position.
This is on Bowlsby
- Thread starter CarlHungus
- Start date
Bowlsby has got to go after this debacle. We knew it was a risk but he was out there insisting on the remaining at 10, yadda yadda yadda. Then they came up with that marketing campaign and spent who knows how many millions on and apparently hadn't considered the possibility of a tie. And then he didn't have the guts to name "one true champion". Now he's ****** off Briles and probably everyone at Baylor, TCU, and who knows how many others. He can't survive. Either that or maybe Pollard can't get us in as 16 to the SEC or Big X and I won't have to give a $*&#.
CycloneErik
Well-Known Member
No matter how they change it, it's always going to be this story. There are only a handful of teams that the people driving college football (media, $, whoever) care to see, and things will always skew in favor of those teams.
Big 12: Oklahoma, Texas
Big 10: Ohio State, Michigan, maybe Nebraska
SEC: Alabama, Florida, probably a few more, because SEC=Awesome and stuff
Pac 12: USC, Oregon
ACC: Florida State. Florida State. Florida State.
Add Notre Dame to that mix.
If you're in competition through your own merit against any of those teams, you've already lost. That's just how college football work. I probably left a couple teams out here and there, but essentially, if you're not on that list, you'll never seriously be in this discussion.
With a few years of this or a similar system under our belts, the story will be that these are the teams with successful records in the playoffs, so it shows that the system is working.
Big 12: Oklahoma, Texas
Big 10: Ohio State, Michigan, maybe Nebraska
SEC: Alabama, Florida, probably a few more, because SEC=Awesome and stuff
Pac 12: USC, Oregon
ACC: Florida State. Florida State. Florida State.
Add Notre Dame to that mix.
If you're in competition through your own merit against any of those teams, you've already lost. That's just how college football work. I probably left a couple teams out here and there, but essentially, if you're not on that list, you'll never seriously be in this discussion.
With a few years of this or a similar system under our belts, the story will be that these are the teams with successful records in the playoffs, so it shows that the system is working.
Bowlsby needs to be fired immediately. What an idiot.
He puts this whole marketing campaign together all year long saying how the Big 12 will have One True Champion, and now he says that the Big 12 will never have ONE true champion if there is a tie. There is no tie breaker he says.
And he says he misspoke during Big 12 media days? What? Truth is, he has no idea what he's doing.
Oh, and he's a suck up to the committee buddies too, over his responsibility to fight for the Big 12. He says he has the utmost respect for the committee and their decision. Really? Why not fight for your teams over your fat cat buddies loser.
He puts this whole marketing campaign together all year long saying how the Big 12 will have One True Champion, and now he says that the Big 12 will never have ONE true champion if there is a tie. There is no tie breaker he says.
And he says he misspoke during Big 12 media days? What? Truth is, he has no idea what he's doing.
Oh, and he's a suck up to the committee buddies too, over his responsibility to fight for the Big 12. He says he has the utmost respect for the committee and their decision. Really? Why not fight for your teams over your fat cat buddies loser.
4 team playoff with 5 power conferences will always leave someone upset. A 6 or 8 team playoff would help, but that won't happen until the SEC gets left out some year.
Rather than expanding, NCAA rule should be changed. Why do you need to have 12 teams to have a championship game. Makes no sense. Never-mind, its the NCAA.
Bottom line is TCU/BU/B12/Bowlsby all left the door open for this to happen.
Rather than expanding, NCAA rule should be changed. Why do you need to have 12 teams to have a championship game. Makes no sense. Never-mind, its the NCAA.
Bottom line is TCU/BU/B12/Bowlsby all left the door open for this to happen.
Because with 10 team conferences you would play a round robin schedule and already have a conference champion? There's zero need for one. The problem isn't with the NCAA, the problem is our own conference for deciding to not declare the true champion after a round robin schedule and instead getting greedy in backing TCU and Baylor instead of just Baylor.
So TCU's loss is to Baylor AT Baylor. What other team in the 4 selected (excluding undefeated FSU) has their sole loss to a team BETTER than Baylor? Nobody, that's who. The playoff w/o TCU is bogus. End of discussion.
Last edited:
The big 12 doesn't really need a championship game, that's the frustrating part that nobody realizes. It makes no sense to have a championship game when everybody plays each other once. Baylor is the champ due to tiebreaker. A b12 championship game was not going to stop OSU from getting selected. Nothing would have.
Important to note though, if we do expand, nothing says we have to give full shares. We could add a UCF as an investment, and give them a partial share as to not affect existing membership as much.
I am afraid that with something like that, a team like Iowa State might be delegated to a partial share also in the next round of money splitting decisions....
Bowlsby screwed up and should have come out and declared BU the champion but he tried to either game the committee or just didn't have the balls to tell TCU tuff luck. Now I don't know if it impacted whether the conference didn't get anyone in.
*except when we want to try to get two teams into the playoff
(and it backfires spectacularly)
CycloneErik
Well-Known Member
On one hand, we don't "have" to offer two more teams a full share.
On the other hand, they know that, at least perception-wise, they have the Big 12 over the barrel, since conventional wisdom of the moment is that we need to expand in order to have a championship game. We need them as badly or worse than they need us. I'm not sure the conference is in a strong bargaining position, even though I don't think the CCG would really matter unless Oklahoma or Texas won it.
On the other hand, they know that, at least perception-wise, they have the Big 12 over the barrel, since conventional wisdom of the moment is that we need to expand in order to have a championship game. We need them as badly or worse than they need us. I'm not sure the conference is in a strong bargaining position, even though I don't think the CCG would really matter unless Oklahoma or Texas won it.
I know people will prob get ****** if I turn this into a big 12 expansion thread but too bad. The big 12 has zero choice but to expand to 12...zero. And adding Memphis and Cincinnati does make perfect sense. Both those two teams bring 10x the tv market than ISU, Ku, ksu combined. I keep hearing all about how the big 12 won't expand unless it adds TV sets blah blah..well the Memphis and Nashville markers are not small neither is Cincinnati which also opens the state of Ohio for recruiting.
the odds of two or three teams tying every year with one loss is quite high and we are back to this same discussion every year with the big 12 being left out.
the odds of two or three teams tying every year with one loss is quite high and we are back to this same discussion every year with the big 12 being left out.
