The Big 12 MUST Schedule a CC Game

[BigdaddyQH]

If the changes about the rules regarding conferences pass this season, then the Big 12 MUST schedule a CC game in 2016 or face getting run out of the Power 5 Conference. The reasoning is simple. The spoiled brats that make up the Big 12 (-2) do NOT want to expand their conference, but want to hold a CC game because they finally figured out what I knew to be the truth last season. No CC game, no playoffs if possible.

Now what happens if the powers that be pass the new rules regarding CC games and allow the Big 12 to have their way and remain a 10 team conference, and then the Big 12 decides NOT to participate? I would gladly be the first in line to kick those arse holes out of the Power 5. There are many conferences who would line up right behind me. They are nothing but a bunch of spoiled teams that think they are actually good, when in fact, they let two nobodies like Baylor and TCU run the conference as far as football is concerned. So the Big 12 has trapped itself again, like they usually do. This is by far, the dumbest conference when it comes to leadership, of all time. Even Big 12 homers must admit that their conference is getting to be a joke.

 

[CoachCB]

I agree they need to schedule a CC game....but they first must expand.

They need to stop kidding themselves (and everyone else) that it's about academics. They need to add 2 teams (minimum) and add the CCG and move into the modern era of college football.

 

[BigdaddyQH]

Coach, I agree 100%. These clowns have to get off their dead tails and do something. What happens if the Pac 12 decides to add two teams leaving 4 power conferences with 14 teams and one with 10? The Big 12 could not FIND 4 teams to join. They certainly will not get anyone from one of the other power 5 conferences and will have to look for 4 teams, not just two. If they get off of their dead tails and get two teams now, the Pac 12 will be perfectly happy to remain at 12 teams. There are still a few teams out there that do not reside in Texas, so all of the idiot Longhorn fans can be happy, and the other idiots in Oklahoma can follow suit if the Not So Big 12 picks up a Cincinnati and a BYU. And please do not hand me any BS about education. Texas and the rest could care less about that.

 

[cloverleaf]

I would almost bet the Big 12 will have a championship game next year (2016)...if not then the following year (2017) even if the number of teams stay the same. The conference can't afford not too if the national championship playoffs stay at four teams.

 

[BigdaddyQH]

The powers that be have already said that the playoffs will continue to be a 4 team playoff for the duration of the contract. I believe that the contract still has 7 years to go.

 

[RunLeeRun]

Conference championship games can go both ways. In the Big 12's history the CC game has hurt it's champion almost as much as it's helped it into the BCS game. It can go both ways. I think it may be a knee-jerk reaction to make a drastic change just on 1 year of data, because it could have been where Ohio State squeeked out a 31-30 win over Wisconsin, or lost (I know big if), and it very well may have been a Big 12 team. Or had Florida St gotten beat by Gtech, which almost did happen. Or, as others have pointed out, if it's Texas/Oklahoma and not TCU/Baylor, we may not be having this discussion. It may be a better formula to have a 12 team conference and play a title game vs a 10 team round robin system, but it may be dangerous territory marrying the two systems. There really isn't any precedent for that and they'd be volunteering as lab-rats. But we do know that 66% of the time in the P5-CCG game it isn't #1 vs #2. That's the advantage of the system, however the knock is that in 30% of all P5-CCG's the outright favorite has lost. If there are 4 CCG's, that's 1.2 games per year. The Brass may choose to play those percentages and stay the course. Here's an interesting chart where I got the data.
History of Power Five Conference Championship Games (1992-2014)

UPSETS (FAVORITE LOST OURIGHT)
CONFERENCE	FREQUENCY
ACC	3 times in 10 years	30 percent
Big Ten	3 times in 4 years	75 percent
Big 12	4 times in 15 years	26.6 percent
Pac-12	1 time in 4 years	25 percent
SEC	6 times in 23 years	26.1 percent
TOTAL	17 times in 56 games	30.3 percent

UNDERDOG (COVERED OR WON OUTRIGHT)
CONFERENCE	FREQUENCY
ACC	5 times in 10 years	50 percent
Big Ten	4 times in 4 years	100 percent
Big 12	6 times in 15 years	40 percent
Pac-12	3 times in 4 years	75 percent
SEC	10 times in 23 games	43.5 percent
TOTAL	28 times in 56 games	50 percent

LOST TITLE CONTENDER (TOP 5 TEAM LOST IN TITLE GAME)
CONFERENCE	FREQUENCY
ACC	2 times in 10 games	20 percent
Big Ten	1 time in 4 years	25 percent
Big 12	3 times in 15 years	20 percent
Pac-12	0 times in 4 years	0 percent
SEC	3 times in 23 years	13 percent
TOTAL	9 times in 56 games	16.1 percent

TITLE BOOST (TITLE-GAME WINNER PLAYED FOR NATIONAL CROWN)+
CONFERENCE	FREQUENCY
ACC	2 times in 10 games	20 percent
Big Ten	1 time in 4 years	25 percent
Big 12	4 times in 15 years	26.6 percent^
Pac-12	1 time in 4 years	25 percent
SEC	13 times in 23 years	56.5 percent
TOTAL	21 times in 56 games	37.5 percent

BEST TEAMS DID NOT MEET (LEAGUE'S HIGHEST-RANKED TEAMS DIDN'T SQUARE OFF)*
CONFERENCE	FREQUENCY
ACC	5 times in 10 years	50 percent
Big Ten	3 times in 4 years	75 percent
Big 12	12 times in 15 years	80 percent
Pac-12	3 times in 4 years	75 percent
SEC	14 times in 23 years	60.9 percent
TOTAL	37 times in 56 games	66.1 percent

 

[GoSooners]

I agree they need to schedule a CC game....but they first must expand.

They need to stop kidding themselves (and everyone else) that it's about academics. They need to add 2 teams (minimum) and add the CCG and move into the modern era of college football.

The Big 12 has been on cruise control for several years now, and they know they need to make changes. I have a feeling they have something in the works for 2016. But even if we had 12 teams and a CG game last year, the Big 12 would have probably still been left out of the Playoff. So the REAL problem still hasn't been solved. At least not until they make a major conference alignment move or expand to 8 teams. Either one would suit me just fine. I agree with you guys 100% that the Big 12 needs 2 more teams. But you want 2 teams that are going to improve your SOS when you have to play that 13th game, or else what good would it do to expand?

 

[groundhog11]

I don't think they need a cc game....other than the additional revenue, it's too big a risk getting upset...let the other cc games possibly have an upset and knock themselves out...the acc most yrs won't qualify anyone....fsu is on a nice roll, but they got lucky several times last yr...once fla gets going, they will knock fsu off most..what it's shows is you have to be undefeated in the acc to basically make...how often will that happen?

 

[GoSooners]

I don't think they need a cc game....other than the additional revenue, it's too big a risk getting upset...let the other cc games possibly have an upset and knock themselves out...the acc most yrs won't qualify anyone....fsu is on a nice roll, but they got lucky several times last yr...once fla gets going, they will knock fsu off most..what it's shows is you have to be undefeated in the acc to basically make...how often will that happen?

I agree ground hog. This is such a reactionary country. If something bad or unfair happens, they immediately think something is broken and needs to be fixed. So a hand breaks one way, and suddenly you have to play cards a totally different way? That kind of reactionary thinking is what made the BCS look like a dog chasing it's tail. They would also change the rules to fix last year's problem...and created a whole new problem they had never anticipated. Like I said in the other thread, there were a lot more scenarios where the Big 12 could have had one, and possibly two teams in the CFP. Everything broke perfectly and the right school got the right result that ended up with the Big 12 shut out. By the way, I still contend that the biggest issue was the fact that Baylor beat TCU. If the records were the same but it was the other way around, TCU goes.

 

[RunLeeRun]

I don't think they need a cc game....other than the additional revenue, it's too big a risk getting upset...let the other cc games possibly have an upset and knock themselves out...the acc most yrs won't qualify anyone....fsu is on a nice roll, but they got lucky several times last yr...once fla gets going, they will knock fsu off most..what it's shows is you have to be undefeated in the acc to basically make...how often will that happen?

Kind of what I was trying to get at. You are playing everybody in conference, and that's pretty challenging. Another conference, by average, will knock themselves out with a title game. The Big 12 will be there at the end, if the dice roll correctly. Things had to roll correctly for Ohio St. If they hadn't rolled Wisconsin, I feel TCU would have gotten in. Let's not forget the committee is learning as they go too. You don't want to go and make a huge knee-jerk reaction and come to find out it backfires for you in year two. Too small of a sample size to know how this works out, but I think 9-game round robin + CCG is more dangerous than good. As I posted before, the other conferences are thriving on Title games of #1 vs anybody but #2. A Big-12 title game of #1 vs #2 is assuming more risk than the other conferences, imo.

 

[GoSooners]

Kind of what I was trying to get at. You are playing everybody in conference, and that's pretty challenging. Another conference, by average, will knock themselves out with a title game. The Big 12 will be there at the end, if the dice roll correctly. Things had to roll correctly for Ohio St. If they hadn't rolled Wisconsin, I feel TCU would have gotten in. Let's not forget the committee is learning as they go too. You don't want to go and make a huge knee-jerk reaction and come to find out it backfires for you in year two. Too small of a sample size to know how this works out, but I think 9-game round robin + CCG is more dangerous than good. As I posted before, the other conferences are thriving on Title games of #1 vs anybody but #2. A Big-12 title game of #1 vs #2 is assuming more risk than the other conferences, imo.

Knowing the Big 12 brass, they've probably got something in the works to have a playoff game for the 2016 season. But I still think it's the wrong move when you play a 10 team round robin format. it is much harder to win a 13th game or go undefeated in a round robin conference than it is a divisional conference. The difference here is you play EVERYBODY. And as always happens with a round robin format, you have to play 2 and sometimes 3 or 4 tough games back to back. You get more leeway with your scheduling in a divisional format. If certain people here want a 13th game so bad for this conference, why not the Big 12 try to petition the NCAA for an extra game for a 13 game regular season? That way they could schedule a good Power 5 out of conference team to play at the beginning of the season to improve their SOS. The NCAA already allows a school to play a 13 game regular season if they schedule Hawaii. Why not expand on that rule?

 

[groundhog11]

I could definitely see a game in 2016, but I think they wait until at least the end of the season before we know....I think the big12 knows that okla,tcu,bay are possible for playoffs...if they would get passed over then I could see something happening...