(12-07-2014 03:20 PM)Knightsweat Wrote:  The committee and the whole CFP process is of their making. I doubt they'd give up on it that easily because the Big12 doesn't want to expand.

The big deal about the CFP was 4 teams instead of 2, and working out the kinks of the bowl rotations. That's all done. Pulling the plug on the committee rankings (and just having them decide who goes to what Access Bowl, and decide that seeding be damned, Ohio STate to the Rose and FSU to the Sugar) is trivially easy, compared to the disruption of more realignment.

Quote:The G5 were the sisters of the poor in that whole deal. They'll go along with whatever gets them paid.

Well, no one's going to stop the world because the G5 says so. But more realignment is obviously not something they want.

(12-07-2014 03:16 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(12-07-2014 02:56 PM)Knightsweat Wrote:  

(12-07-2014 02:28 PM)ken d Wrote:  For those who think the current system for picking the four prettiest girls at the dance should cause the Big 12 to expand, I have a question. How much money should each Big 12 member be willing to pay every year in order to gamble that no future panel of judges will pick a more marketable team ahead of one of theirs? $3 million? $5 million? More?

They could pay that much to add a couple of schools, and still get screwed by the committee. If Baylor had beaten TCU in a championship game to finish 11-2 instead of 12-1, would that have assured them a spot over Ohio State? So these schools would be gambling millions each and every year in the hope that occasionally having a CCG might help them get something they wouldn't have gotten otherwise from a committee that has the authority to do as it pleases. How often might that happen? Once in five years? Ten? Who knows. That would be a very foolish gamble.

And the status quo is a better option? You're asking why, and really the question should be why wouldn't you? You know having a 1-2 loss team now means an access bowl, but not a CFP slot. Expanding and doing the CCG means equal consideration for the CFP. It's worth that if you ever want a shot at a national title.

Or you can go undefeated, which happens all the time, right?

Am I the only one skeptical that the power conferences will choose "force the Big XII to expand" over "take the committee out behind a barn and shoot 'em"?

Isn't it easier, and more comfy for the SEC, BiG and PAC, to do that than it is to push the Big XII to expand into southwest Ohio or east Tennessee or the Florida I-4 corridor or into Colorado or Chicago or Utah or San Diego?

Maybe, instead of figuring out how to find enough change in the couch cushions to fund 2 more Big 12 teams while costing everyone only $1M instead of $3M, hire some $1M defensive coordinators?

EDIT: Oh, and to the extent that the G5 conferences get a say, I don't think they want Big 12 expansion either.

I cannot figure out why the Big 12 does not expand. The Big 12 can contract the new expansion members for less than a full share. For example, Cincy and Memphis only make 2 million in their current arrangement. Adding the Conference championship game adds value. I have seen a figure as high as 25 million for the game alone. It also gives the conference the added strength for playoff purposes. How is this not added value.

In addition, the conference adds the value of new markets. For instance, I am a fan of the AAC, since this is where my team plays. I watch many games on CBS sports network, because of this relationship. I watch very few Big 12/Fox games. This would change. Cincy,,Memphis, mid Florida are large markets. Much money can be made in large markets. In addition, these are great recruiting grounds. It makes zero sense. There is something unseen and I would bet it surrounds the Longhorn network.

The Big 12 has avoided a championship game out of fear and greed. Sleep in the bed you made...

(12-07-2014 03:53 PM)LSUtah Wrote:  The Big 12 has avoided a championship game out of fear and greed. Sleep in the bed you made...

Says the fan of a conference that took two Big 12 middle of the pack teams in order to increase $ from a conference network while decreasing games between long time rivals.