Please please please bring back big12 title game
- Thread starter ZB4CY
- Start date
There still would be one true champion if there was a championship game. I want to add 2 teams for fb and keep it the way it is for basketball.
Way more exciting. I want to see OU in the CFP, but would be happy in other ways if they were to be snubbed. The Big 12 needs to add 2 teams to regain its relevancy. To me, its akin to recruiting kids nowadays without Twitter presence. You can be as legit as anyone in the eyes of the purists, but it matters not in the eyes of those that matter most. In the case of the CFP, championship weekend matters. It matters for the average fan (we who apply "eyeballs" for the advertising execs), it matters to potential recruits, and it matters to the committee member (... at least when it's convenient for them.)
Seems inconclusive to me
Unlike last year where so many people begged the Big 12 to add non-Power 5 schools because the conference would never get into the playoff without a championship game...
I'd like to see the Big 12 have like, you know- twelve teams...
Maybe some day. For now we should be happy to take the money and run.
Maybe some day. For now we should be happy to take the money and run.
some of us are either really young, or have really short memories.
Not THAT long ago, we had a championship game, and the powers that be used a loss for the big dog/win by underdog to keep the big xII out of a bcs game. (put a big 10 team in instead right?)
Now that WE don't have a CCG they've moved the target so supposedly it's a really big deal to have one.
(eyeroll).
It's kind of like the weather in Iowa people, the only thing consistent is that committees are Inconsistent.
I take
that back, they ARE consistent about one thing, if they can favor the B10/SEC and shaft the Big XII and
cover their tracks they will.
At least the leadership in the Big XII seems to have caught on to the scam even if many of our fans
haven't.
----------->There's no point in our changing gears, as they'll just move the target again.<---------
NO JIMLAD
go Cyclones
Not THAT long ago, we had a championship game, and the powers that be used a loss for the big dog/win by underdog to keep the big xII out of a bcs game. (put a big 10 team in instead right?)
Now that WE don't have a CCG they've moved the target so supposedly it's a really big deal to have one.
(eyeroll).
It's kind of like the weather in Iowa people, the only thing consistent is that committees are Inconsistent.
I take
that back, they ARE consistent about one thing, if they can favor the B10/SEC and shaft the Big XII and
cover their tracks they will.
At least the leadership in the Big XII seems to have caught on to the scam even if many of our fans
haven't.
----------->There's no point in our changing gears, as they'll just move the target again.<---------
NO JIMLAD
go Cyclones
Last edited:
The problem is not title game vs no title game. The problem is we have one no name stooge on the entire committee.
If we still had the BCS ranking instead of this committee to pick 4 teams we'd be fine. The computer 1/3 generaly goes nuts over B12 football (even without being allowed to consider margin of victory) and the other 2/3 would have some bias but nothing as radical as the 3 to 1 type of bias this committee has.
It's all about the committee makeup in terms of in or out, title game/expansion should only be done if it cements Big 12 stability and increases $$$$$. If we expand or add a title game thinking it will positively impact playoff birth while it damages conference stability or $$$$ then our conference is run by fools.
Not specifically about this thread but it's funny hearing B1G fans say the Big 12 should have a championship game to be able to play for a National Title. I come back and say that there has been more Big 12 Championship games than B1G.
you're making my point.
But it's not just that it's not about CCG or not, it's not about ANY particular facet of the
game. All about power, money, conference affiliation, and ESPN
supposedly we have a "nobody" on the committee. If so, it's just one more indicator
of the deck being stacked against the Big XII
IMHO it's not even debatable but whatever
But it's not just that it's not about CCG or not, it's not about ANY particular facet of the
game. All about power, money, conference affiliation, and ESPN
supposedly we have a "nobody" on the committee. If so, it's just one more indicator
of the deck being stacked against the Big XII
IMHO it's not even debatable but whatever
Maybe not directly related but I would still say the only reason we have a team in is because of name bias. No way any team besides Oklahoma (or Texas if they were any good) would be in this year by losing to a bad team.
I wouldn't mind this; there would be even more intrigue.
Next year the Big 12 is going from 2 games to 3 games on the last weekend. I guess they could leave out Kansas and Iowa State and go to 4 the year after...
I saw an obviously non-ESPN story that chronicled how Ohio State has benefitted more from not playing a CCG than any other team in the BCS era.
If the Big 12 still doesn't have a title game in 10 years and benefits like this year more than is hurt like last year then we can begin that discussion with Big Ten fans.
Since ISU would probably be a division similar to what the Big 12 North was, and since they still screwed up against teams that weren't very good that would probably also be in that division, they'd still more than likely not make it into the Title game, so personally not sure if I care one way or the other.
My desire for Big 12 strength/stability > my desire for an easier football division than our current 9 games
For the same point you made.
