• The KillerFrogs

  • EECU the card that wins TCU championships

    EECU the card that wins TCU championships

Bowlsby Seeking Championship Game

NYC Horned Frog

NYC Horned Frog

Full Member
http://espn.go.com/blog/big12/post/_/id/63393/big-12-championship-ready-to-return

I do remember hearing about it, but now it looks like Big-12 is going to push for waiver to get a Championship game.
 
NYC Horned Frog

NYC Horned Frog

Full Member
It does seem weird because it would put the league in a situation where a definite second place could win the league screwing the team with the better record.

It would definitely boost ratings. Would it maybe boost perception about strength and rankings? True or not it's more exposure and buildup for Big 12..
 
Delmonico

Delmonico

Semi-Omnipotent Being
Unconfirmed reports made previously on the Internets were that the 'Champions Bowl' agreement includes a provision that both conferences have a CCG. Don't know if its true, but it would certainly explain the interest in a waiver.
 
Opintel

Opintel

Moderators
If the idea is to have your right now best team represent the conference, then a final game at the end works. Teams change from the start, through 10+ games (we know).

More $$$, which is the real reason. Re-negotiate, repeat.

Personally, a B12 having 14 teams sounds right (The Big Fourteen); I'd prefer seven division games, four OOC/Crossovers, and two "off" weeks, but not the first week. A Championship for two teams December 1st (ish), and then Bowl Season. Lots of cash, a little rest for the players, and all is right with the world... :biggrin:
 
frognutz

frognutz

Active Member
RSF said:
Unconfirmed reports made previously on the Internets were that the 'Champions Bowl' agreement includes a provision that both conferences have a CCG. Don't know if its true, but it would certainly explain the interest in a waiver.
Click to expand...

There has to be some reason for this because any idiot can do the math and see that the BIG 12 needs to be playing less games against one another and not more if it ever hopes to win another NC.
 
rifram09

rifram09

Active Member
I like it. We'd probably have two 5 team divisions. Annual schedule could be (in no particular order):

(1) OOC (SMU)
(2) OOC (ACC)
(3) OOC (Marquee)
(4) OOC (FCS)
(5) Division game 1 (UT)
(6) Division game 2 (Baylor)
(7) Division game 3 (TTU)
(8) Division game 4
(9) Permanent Cross Division Rival
(10) Cross-division game 1
(11) Cross-division game 2
(12) Cross Division game 3
(13) B12 CCG
(14) Bowl Game

Benefits of a bigger league without splitting up the pie. Not a bad option while we're waiting for B1G and SEC to upset the apple cart.

EDIT: Made a mistake on the original schedule. Same effect though.
 
Froggle Rock

Froggle Rock

Full Member
Rifram09 said:
I like it. We'd probably have two 5 team divisions. Annual schedule could be (in no particular order):

(1) OOC (SMU)
(2) OOC (ACC)
(3) OOC (Marquee)
(4) OOC (FCS)
(5) Division game 1 (UT)
(6) Division game 2 (Baylor)
(7) Division game 3 (TTU)
(8) Division game 4
(9) Division game 5
(10) Cross-division game 1
(11) Cross-division game 2
(12) Cross-division game 3
(13) B12 CCG
(14) Bowl Game

Benefits of a bigger league without splitting up the pie. Not a bad option while we're waiting for B1G and SEC to upset the apple cart.
Click to expand...

One minor edit, we would only have four division games (with us being the 5th division member).

So do we add a cross division rival and cycle one out and the other in every year? Or would we add a non-conference game and have 7 in conference 5 ooc. I think that would be highly frowned upon by the voters.
 
rifram09

rifram09

Active Member
Froggle Rock said:
One minor edit, we would only have four division games (with us being the 5th division member).

So do we add a cross division rival and cycle one out and the other in every year? Or would we add a non-conference game and have 7 in conference 5 ooc. I think that would be highly frowned upon by the voters.
Click to expand...

Ha, realized that after I hit "submit." I'd vote for permanent cross division rival. See above.

EDIT: A 7/5 split would be less frowned upon if we had a scheduling agreement with another top conference like the SEC and ACC. I could get behind the7/5 split if we had that. Scheduling would be pretty uniform:

(1) OOC (SMU)
(2) OOC (ACC)
(3) OOC (SEC)
(4) OOC (Marquee matchup)
(5) OOC (FCS)
(6) division game (TTU)
(7) division game (BU)
(8) division game (UT)
(9) division game
(10) Cross-division 1
(11) Cross-division 2
(12) Cross-division 3
(13) B12 CCG
(14) Bowl

If we filled that extra OOC game with a late season cream puff circa SEC, I think you're right.
 
S

sheetman

New Member
Can't help but think UT is behind this, and Bowlsby is caving to their demands. Obviously UT is in a position where they are no longer winning the regular season title, so they are trying to create a scenario in which they can get a mulligan if they finish 2nd. But what if the final conference standings looked like this:

1st place: 9-0
2nd place: 6-3
3rd place: 6-3
4th place: 6-3

Do we really need a conference championship game? Didn't the 1st place team already prove itself enough by winning the league outright and beating all 3 teams that finished 2nd? And the [ Finebaum ]storm that would occur with the tiebreaker to see who got 2nd place? And what if that 6-3 2nd place team ended up winning in an upset in the conference championship game and knocked that 9-0 team out of the 4 team playoff? Wouldn't the Big 12 feel stupid then?
 
rifram09

rifram09

Active Member
sheetman said:
Can't help but think UT is behind this, and Bowlsby is caving to their demands. Obviously UT is in a position where they are no longer winning the regular season title, so they are trying to create a scenario in which they can get a mulligan if they finish 2nd. But what if the final conference standings looked like this:

1st place: 9-0
2nd place: 6-3
3rd place: 6-3
4th place: 6-3

Do we really need a conference championship game? Didn't the 1st place team already prove itself enough by winning the league outright and beating all 3 teams that finished 2nd? And the [ Finebaum ]storm that would occur with the tiebreaker to see who got 2nd place? And what if that 6-3 2nd place team ended up winning in an upset in the conference championship game and knocked that 9-0 team out of the 4 team playoff? Wouldn't the Big 12 feel stupid then?
Click to expand...

Ya, adding a CCG on top of round robin schedule would be redundant and stupid. Unless we get divisions, I don't want a CCG.
 
West Coast Johnny

West Coast Johnny

Full Member
Can't wait for a big 12 national championship contender to be knocked off by an 8-4 also ran in the Championship game. Oh well, at least everyone gets paid $$$.
 
Opintel

Opintel

Moderators
The playoffs are coming - let me refer you to my earlier post - and consider that adds more games (hopefully) to our schedule. When it moves to an eight team playoff format, we'd be ready.
 
D

Despite the odds Frog

Active Member
Seems to be a really dumb idea with the round robin.

Now if Big 12 had SEC scheduling with not having to play the best teams each year and starting the year early to space the year out to benefit each team then yes, championship game makes sense. Playing a cream puff week 10 would be beneficial as well like the SEC does. SEC doesn't beat each other up because of the schedule thus the strong bowl appearances. If Big 12 had SEC like scheduling I would be all in for a championship game.

Big 12 is going to beat itself up to submission. Yes, more money per team but the year after year of perceived mediocrity will make the Big 12 very unstable for poaching or a team deciding to leave.
 
10 Key Frog

10 Key Frog

Active Member
The biggest benefit I could see out of this is from a strength of schedule argument for the tournament committee. This would give a late season boost to the strength of schedule of the winner going into a 4 team playoff and potentially keep a school from dropping a seed due to not having that late boost.
 

Latest posts

Top