Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Poll: Does the Big 12's petition to have a CCG pass?
Yes
No
[Show Results]
 
Post Reply 
The Big 12's petition for a conference championship
Author Message
Native Georgian Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 27,519
Joined: May 2008
Reputation: 1024
I Root For: TULANE+GA.STATE
Location: Decatur GA
Post: #41
RE: The Big 12's petition for a conference championship
(12-11-2014 11:27 PM)LSUtah Wrote:  
(12-11-2014 10:29 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  Tim Brando said in a radio interview that he thought the Big <12 would get to hold a CCG with just 10 members.
Tim Brando also predicted no SEC teams in 1st playoff...
Point taken. Brando's not right 100% of the time.

But he is (IMHO) a highly-informed and honest observer.
12-12-2014 03:14 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DaSaintFan Offline
Dum' Sutherner in Midwest!
*

Posts: 15,862
Joined: Mar 2010
Reputation: 402
I Root For: Southern Miss
Location: Stuck in St. Louis
Post: #42
RE: The Big 12's petition for a conference championship
(12-11-2014 11:44 AM)bullet Wrote:  I don't think it will pass.

Agreed.. it wont' pass.. they tried it before and it didn't get anywhere.

Hey, we got cut out of the CCG set up, so let's try to pass it again?

Nope, won't happen.
12-12-2014 04:02 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CommuterBob Offline
Head Tailgater
*

Posts: 5,840
Joined: Feb 2012
Reputation: 173
I Root For: UCF, Ohio State
Location:
Post: #43
RE: The Big 12's petition for a conference championship
(12-11-2014 01:28 PM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote:  
(12-11-2014 01:24 PM)TrojanCampaign Wrote:  
(12-11-2014 01:05 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  I believe the B12, ACC and all the G5 conferences will vote yes.

Pretty sure the G5 conferences will vote no.

Voting no ensures that the Big 12 will eventually be forced to add teams which benefits everyone except the Sun Belt.

Big 12>MWC/AAC>MAC/CUSA>SBC>FCS

That's pretty much how things will go.

You have AAC teams salivating at the Big 12, you have CUSA teams salivating at the AAC, and you have SBC teams salivating at CUSA.

I think its the opposite- Big 12 expansion hurts the G5 leagues because it creates another round of instability. I think there is a lot of expansion fatigue around right now. Sure there will be individual institutions that would benefit, but the conference entities themselves will become unstable again.

Maybe, but you forget who actually votes - the presidents of the individual colleges that are appointed as representatives, not the conference commissioners. The presidents have their own prerogatives and those may or may not be in line with their conferences. I would wager that Dr. John Hitt, UCF's president and representative for the AAC, would vote against it because of what effect it could have on his school.

And if this goes after the autonomy rules are in place, it becomes a FBS football issue, meaning that each P5 gets 2x weighted vote and each G5 only gets 1x weighted vote. They would need at least four of the G5 to vote with the XII/ACC to counter the SEC/B1G/PAC.
12-12-2014 04:09 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CommuterBob Offline
Head Tailgater
*

Posts: 5,840
Joined: Feb 2012
Reputation: 173
I Root For: UCF, Ohio State
Location:
Post: #44
RE: The Big 12's petition for a conference championship
(12-12-2014 11:51 AM)Wedge Wrote:  
(12-12-2014 04:45 AM)goofus Wrote:  Another Point. The original rule was not arbitrary. It was originally proposed as 14 teams and changed to 12. This shows it was discussed and there was some logic to the number 12 that was chosen and not 14 and not 10.

Of course there was a reason for the original rule -- to allow lower-division conferences a way to determine a clear champion and autobid winner for the NCAA tournament in their division, when the conference is too large to play a round-robin -- but that doesn't matter here given that we are talking about a rule that was never intended to apply to FBS conferences in the first place. The rule, if properly drafted, would have been written to apply only to I-AA/FCS and D-II and D-III, but the rule was poorly written and the SEC discovered that and took advantage of it.

When talking about amending the current rule to deal with how FBS conferences are using it, it's just practical politics. If the proposal is to change the rule only to do what the ACC wants, it probably won't pass. If the proposal is to change the rule only to do what the Big 12 wants, it probably won't pass. If they're smart, they'll make a proposal that allows both the ACC and Big 12 to do what they want, and then (assuming that this is a rule they can pass under "autonomy") they only have to convince a few of the other P5 schools to vote in favor.

It would be an FBS issue, not an autonomy issue. It would not fall under any of the categories of autonomy and affects football rules. All of FBS would have to vote on it, with the P5 each getting a 2x vote per conference and the G5 getting a 1x vote per conference.
12-12-2014 04:12 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Wedge Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 19,862
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 964
I Root For: California
Location: IV, V, VI, IX
Post: #45
RE: The Big 12's petition for a conference championship
(12-12-2014 04:12 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  
(12-12-2014 11:51 AM)Wedge Wrote:  
(12-12-2014 04:45 AM)goofus Wrote:  Another Point. The original rule was not arbitrary. It was originally proposed as 14 teams and changed to 12. This shows it was discussed and there was some logic to the number 12 that was chosen and not 14 and not 10.

Of course there was a reason for the original rule -- to allow lower-division conferences a way to determine a clear champion and autobid winner for the NCAA tournament in their division, when the conference is too large to play a round-robin -- but that doesn't matter here given that we are talking about a rule that was never intended to apply to FBS conferences in the first place. The rule, if properly drafted, would have been written to apply only to I-AA/FCS and D-II and D-III, but the rule was poorly written and the SEC discovered that and took advantage of it.

When talking about amending the current rule to deal with how FBS conferences are using it, it's just practical politics. If the proposal is to change the rule only to do what the ACC wants, it probably won't pass. If the proposal is to change the rule only to do what the Big 12 wants, it probably won't pass. If they're smart, they'll make a proposal that allows both the ACC and Big 12 to do what they want, and then (assuming that this is a rule they can pass under "autonomy") they only have to convince a few of the other P5 schools to vote in favor.

It would be an FBS issue, not an autonomy issue. It would not fall under any of the categories of autonomy and affects football rules. All of FBS would have to vote on it, with the P5 each getting a 2x vote per conference and the G5 getting a 1x vote per conference.

Then, they would need 8 "votes" to pass (each P5 gets 2 votes, each G5 gets 1, total 15). If the proposed rule is written such that both the ACC and Big 12 support it, they start with 4 votes in their favor. They have to get 2 additional P5 conferences, or 4 G5 conferences, or 1 P5 plus 2 G5 to vote yes.

Just as a guess, the AAC and SBC are yes votes, and then they'll need to persuade either one P5 conference or two of the other G5 conferences.
12-12-2014 04:59 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.