Here's why:

1) Nobody available is worth anything like $35 million yearly in CFP and media money.

2) In all probability, the Big 12 did NOT get left out of the CFP because they lacked a CCG. The following are far more likely reasons:

a) Since there are 5 major conferences and only 4 playoff spots, SOMEBODY has to get left out every year. It's inevitable.

In this case, one can make a rational argument for Ohio State > Baylor, whom the committee clearly considered to be the "real" Big 12 champ despite the formal designation. Evaluating Baylor and Ohio State, both teams lost a game but Baylor played the softer schedule. When two teams have the same record, SOS is a rational reason for picking between them, so the committee cannot be faulted for putting OSU > Baylor. Baylor was also inferior to each of the other P5 champs, so they were, objectively, the 5th best of the 5 major champs.

IOW's, there's nothing about the committee's decision that necessarily suggests that a lack of a CCG hurt the Big 12. Baylor's SOS was sunk by their poor OOC schedule. Had they played Minnesota, like TCU did, they probably move past Ohio State. That problem can't be solved by a CCG.

b) TV Politics: Ohio State is a blue-chip name, TCU and Baylor are not. Had the Big 12 champ been a big name, like Oklahoma or Texas, chances are they don't get jumped by Ohio State.

c) Bowlsby stupidly lacked the guts to name Baylor the champ. You don't need a CCG to have a clear-cut champ, just a valid tie-breaker procedure, and H2H was the obvious one. But by not doing this, Bowlsby made it easy for the committee to punt on both them and TCU in favor of a clear-cut champ, OSU. As i noted above, the committee almost certainly went ahead and regarded Baylor as the champ anyway, but Bowlsby's failure to formally name them made the committee's job easier as they knew it would provide them with cover in the media.

None of these problems would be resolved by adding two teams and playing a CCG.

(12-09-2014 12:31 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Here's why:

1) Nobody available is worth anything like $35 million yearly in CFP and media money.

2) In all probability, the Big 12 did NOT get left out of the CFP because they lacked a CCG. The following are far more likely reasons:

a) Since there are 5 major conferences and only 4 playoff spots, SOMEBODY has to get left out every year. It's inevitable.

b) TV Politics: Ohio State is a blue-chip name, TCU and Baylor are not. Had the Big 12 champ been a big name, like Oklahoma or Texas, chances are they don't get jumped by Ohio State.

c) Bowlsby stupidly lacked the guts to name Baylor the champ. You don't need a CCG to have a clear-cut champ, just a valid tie-breaker procedure, and H2H was the obvious one. But by not doing this, Bowlsby made it easy for the committee to punt on both them and TCU in favor of a clear-cut champ, OSU.

None of these problems would be resolved by adding two teams and playing a CCG.

I can see the ACC being out most years once Winston leaves. This year all the P5 conferences that have a CG were lucky the favored teams won. Upsets happen all the time. Having a CG is a double edged sword. Had Florida State lost to Georgia Tech, the Seminoles would be out and the Frogs in and all this CG talk would be moot.

Adding Cincinnati, BYU, Memphis, UConn, etc absolutely does nothing to the Big XII.

points A and B are the exact reason the Big 12 has to expand. Without a conference championship, teams like Baylor and TCU won't make it to the college playoff because they don't have the 'pedigree'. Throw in a conference championship and 1-loss teams like Baylor and TCU have a strong enough schedule so as not to be dropped 3 places while winning their last game in a blow-out victory.

(12-09-2014 12:31 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Here's why:

1) Nobody available is worth anything like $35 million yearly in CFP and media money.

2) In all probability, the Big 12 did NOT get left out of the CFP because they lacked a CCG. The following are far more likely reasons:

a) Since there are 5 major conferences and only 4 playoff spots, SOMEBODY has to get left out every year. It's inevitable.

In this case, one can make a rational argument for Ohio State > Baylor, whom the committee clearly considered to be the "real" Big 12 champ despite the formal designation. Evaluating Baylor and Ohio State, both teams lost a game but Baylor played the softer schedule. When two teams have the same record, SOS is a rational reason for picking between them, so the committee cannot be faulted for putting OSU > Baylor. Baylor was also inferior to each of the other P5 champs, so they were, objectively, the 5th best of the 5 major champs.

IOW's, there's nothing about the committee's decision that necessarily suggests that a lack of a CCG hurt the Big 12. Baylor's SOS was sunk by their poor OOC schedule. Had they played Minnesota, like TCU did, they probably move past Ohio State. That problem can't be solved by a CCG.

b) TV Politics: Ohio State is a blue-chip name, TCU and Baylor are not. Had the Big 12 champ been a big name, like Oklahoma or Texas, chances are they don't get jumped by Ohio State.

c) Bowlsby stupidly lacked the guts to name Baylor the champ. You don't need a CCG to have a clear-cut champ, just a valid tie-breaker procedure, and H2H was the obvious one. But by not doing this, Bowlsby made it easy for the committee to punt on both them and TCU in favor of a clear-cut champ, OSU. As i noted above, the committee almost certainly went ahead and regarded Baylor as the champ anyway, but Bowlsby's failure to formally name them made the committee's job easier as they knew it would provide them with cover in the media.

None of these problems would be resolved by adding two teams and playing a CCG.

CCG's help with SOS. That's relevant to point "A." However, I agree. The Big XII won't expand.

The problem with a Big 12 CCG would be the same as they were having already before schools started leaving. The North and South Divisions were increasingly unbalanced. It would be even worse now with the likes of those that are talked about.

The Texas schools and Oklahoma schools don't want to separate. Expansion is pretty much impossible for the Big 12 because of internal disputes.

(12-09-2014 12:44 AM)canewton Wrote:  points A and B are the exact reason the Big 12 has to expand. Without a conference championship, teams like Baylor and TCU won't make it to the college playoff because they don't have the 'pedigree'. Throw in a conference championship and 1-loss teams like Baylor and TCU have a strong enough schedule so as not to be dropped 3 places while winning their last game in a blow-out victory.

Name a team that helps Baylor/TCU this year, next year and beyond?

Lets say next year, it's 8-1 Oklahoma and 8-1 Texas Tech--- who gets in? If its 8-1 Texas and 8-1 K-State-- who gets in? Adding 2 schools will not help us.

This was the perfect storm and the 2 smallest Big 12 schools paid the price.

The Big Ten got $24 million for their CCG, and that was before the CFP. Because of the CFP, a CCG is more valuable than ever. Alabama, Oregon, FSU, and OSU were all playing for their playoff lives. It is speculated that a Big 12 CCG will net somewhere between $30 and $50 million from a network. The money issue can be resolved, quite easily. Split the CCG money between the 2 new schools and they will be more than happy.

Sounds to me like someone's butthurt that his Bulls aren't seriously being considered for the spot...

(12-09-2014 01:49 AM)robertfoshizzle Wrote:  The Big Ten got $24 million for their CCG, and that was before the CFP. Because of the CFP, a CCG is more valuable than ever. Alabama, Oregon, FSU, and OSU were all playing for their playoff lives. It is speculated that a Big 12 CCG will net somewhere between $30 and $50 million from a network. The money issue can be resolved, quite easily. Split the CCG money between the 2 new schools and they will be more than happy.

That would solve the money issue or new teams being worth the current split in money. Half of each conference is not worth what they receive in conference money.

so everyone assuming ncaa says no to a champ game with 10?

(12-09-2014 12:44 AM)canewton Wrote:  points A and B are the exact reason the Big 12 has to expand. Without a conference championship, teams like Baylor and TCU won't make it to the college playoff because they don't have the 'pedigree'. Throw in a conference championship and 1-loss teams like Baylor and TCU have a strong enough schedule so as not to be dropped 3 places while winning their last game in a blow-out victory.

I don't think so. There's no evidence of stigma against the Big 12. Had the situation been reversed, and had the Big 12 champ been Texas, there's little chance a smaller-name B1G team, say a Minnesota, that won the B1G championship game, gets jumped over Texas.

IOW's, if Texas had TCU or Baylor resume and Minnesota had Ohio State's, no way Texas gets bumped out. The B1G champ game wouldn't have made a difference.

It just so happened that this year, the Big 12 had the "small name" champs. That can happen to any conference.

(12-09-2014 05:47 AM)TIGER-PAUL Wrote:  so everyone assuming ncaa says no to a champ game with 10?

Well Chip Brown on Sirius from the ppl he spoke with don't think it will happen.

(12-09-2014 06:51 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-09-2014 12:44 AM)canewton Wrote:  points A and B are the exact reason the Big 12 has to expand. Without a conference championship, teams like Baylor and TCU won't make it to the college playoff because they don't have the 'pedigree'. Throw in a conference championship and 1-loss teams like Baylor and TCU have a strong enough schedule so as not to be dropped 3 places while winning their last game in a blow-out victory.

I don't think so. There's no evidence of stigma against the Big 12. Had the situation been reversed, and had the Big 12 champ been Texas, there's little chance a smaller-name B1G team, say a Minnesota, that won the B1G championship game, gets jumped over Texas.

IOW's, if Texas had TCU or Baylor resume and Minnesota had Ohio State's, no way Texas gets bumped out. The B1G champ game wouldn't have made a difference.

It just so happened that this year, the Big 12 had the "small name" champs. That can happen to any conference.

1. They don't want to expand but it is out their they want and the way it appears they need a Championship Game...it has been set that basically if you're 11-1 amd the other P5 Champions are 12-1 you're out...if it is true that it costing you to lose $14 Million a year you can leave that on the table.

2. CCG are now worth a lot more then ever before and it "might" pay for the expansion and then some. If they don't get the waiver what I could see them dping is offer BYU-(Football Only) and Cincinnati...it been reported that they have talked to the Bearcats...some denials but Mike Decourcey doesn't make stuff up.

It going to be a very interesting Summer...

Want to know WHY the Big XII doesn't have a team in the CFP?

12-1>11-1.

It's really that simple. There's no complicated conspiracy.

12-1>11-1.

(12-09-2014 07:07 AM)BearcatJerry Wrote:  Want to know WHY the Big XII doesn't have a team in the CFP?

12-1>11-1.

It's really that simple. There's no complicated conspiracy.

12-1>11-1.

Yup....everyone else has that one extra game and usually against a tough Opponent...that and the fact that most of their teams especially Baylor OOC Schedule.

I expect the Big12 to maintain their current course for a couple reasons:

1 - Pride/Ego
2 - Lack of vision

#1 is evident in that the Big12 wants to get the other conference commissioners to give them a 10-game CCG. IT WON'T HAPPEN!

We've seen #2 on too many occasions. Bowlsby and the Big12 are at the mercy of the LHN. I say, let UT leave if they want to, add 3 teams in strong TV markets and start up a Big12 network. They'd make more money in the long run. It's worked for the SEC, Big10 and Pac12 and it will work for them.

This is the old Big East all over again, Just watch what happens when short-sighted old men, full of themselves, refuse to move forward. If they don't make these moves, the Big12 will be no more in 5 years.

Being left out of the playoffs is worth one team. A CG is worth another team. Then you add the new markets if they are the right ones.

I don't think the XII is going to expand either. I think the playoff is going to expand and all of the power conference champions will be guaranteed a spot. That makes more sense than anything.

This "Stupid to expand" rationale is very similar to the Big East before the football conference was destroyed. They didn't want to split the money more ways, they didn't want to expand into new markets, and they wanted to keep the BCS bid.

Look what happened - they got picked over, the most valuable properties left, they no longer had the power to get the teams they wanted, and the Big East football conference is now gone. When the Big East finally invited BYU, independence was a better option. That also impacted the viability of inviting Boise St, and trickled down to losing San Diego St. Back in 2006 the Big East could have easily swept up BYU, Boise, TCU, and SDSU, had a championship game, opened up new markets, had a 9 figure TV deal, and eliminated a competing conference, all while charging the 4 teams 10 million+ for the privilege.

When you look at the Big 12 the two most valuable properties are fine - Texas and Oklahoma would be great in the Big 10, SEC, ACC, or independent. They were almost in the Pac-10, and may yet go back there. Kansas would probably transfer to a basketball-heavy conference. Where would that leave the rest of the Big 12?

The remaining 7 teams would likely not retain P5 status, and their TV contract would probably drop to $5-8 mill / team in today's money. Since that is what BYU can get on their own, why join after the big teams leave? Similarly, Cincy would pay tens of millions to join the Big 12 right now, but would only be willing to pay a few million once the breakup happens.

One of the big lessons of conference realignment is to get big, and get teams in before your teams get taken away. You also have to compete with the other big conferences for teams and media markets, or your own will get taken away.

If you look at the last 40 years the Big 12 is the only power conference to have it's most valuable properties almost leave, and have 4 teams bail. Since 1990 the SEC has gone from 10->14, ACC from 8->14.5, Pac 10 from 10->12, and the Big 10 from 10->14. The Big 8/SWC has gone from 8+8 to 12 then 10, the only power conference beside the Big East to lose teams.

Quite frankly, Bowlsby obviously can see the above numbers. He knows the conference needs to expand - he would have to be an idiot not to see it. What he needed was a shocking event to get the Big XII presidents to agree. This is why he moved so swiftly and vocally to push for expansion. While he didn't want the crisis, he also doesn't want the lesson to be lost, and have it go to waste.

(12-09-2014 12:31 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Here's why:

1) Nobody available is worth anything like $35 million yearly in CFP and media money.

2) In all probability, the Big 12 did NOT get left out of the CFP because they lacked a CCG. The following are far more likely reasons:

a) Since there are 5 major conferences and only 4 playoff spots, SOMEBODY has to get left out every year. It's inevitable.

In this case, one can make a rational argument for Ohio State > Baylor, whom the committee clearly considered to be the "real" Big 12 champ despite the formal designation. Evaluating Baylor and Ohio State, both teams lost a game but Baylor played the softer schedule. When two teams have the same record, SOS is a rational reason for picking between them, so the committee cannot be faulted for putting OSU > Baylor. Baylor was also inferior to each of the other P5 champs, so they were, objectively, the 5th best of the 5 major champs.

IOW's, there's nothing about the committee's decision that necessarily suggests that a lack of a CCG hurt the Big 12. Baylor's SOS was sunk by their poor OOC schedule. Had they played Minnesota, like TCU did, they probably move past Ohio State. That problem can't be solved by a CCG.

b) TV Politics: Ohio State is a blue-chip name, TCU and Baylor are not. Had the Big 12 champ been a big name, like Oklahoma or Texas, chances are they don't get jumped by Ohio State.

c) Bowlsby stupidly lacked the guts to name Baylor the champ. You don't need a CCG to have a clear-cut champ, just a valid tie-breaker procedure, and H2H was the obvious one. But by not doing this, Bowlsby made it easy for the committee to punt on both them and TCU in favor of a clear-cut champ, OSU. As i noted above, the committee almost certainly went ahead and regarded Baylor as the champ anyway, but Bowlsby's failure to formally name them made the committee's job easier as they knew it would provide them with cover in the media.

None of these problems would be resolved by adding two teams and playing a CCG.

Question: if Florida State had lost one game this season, would they have been included in the playoffs this year? If not, does that mean that the ACC champ has to go undefeated to get a seat?