Brett McMurphy @McMurphyESPN · 1m 1 minute ago
Big 12’s Bob Bowlsby: “What we heard is if we don’t go to a championship game we’re at a disadvantage"
4 retweets 1 favorite
Reply Retweet4 Favorite1 Follow
More
Brett McMurphy @McMurphyESPN · 5m 5 minutes ago
Bob Bowlsby “I surmise a move in that direction (toward having future Big 12 title game)”
10 retweets 3 favorites
Reply Retweet10 Favorite3 Follow
More
Brett McMurphy @McMurphyESPN · 6m 6 minutes ago
Bob Bowlsby said Jeff Long indicated “13 (games) better than 12.” If Big 12 at disadvantage Big 12 would look to add future title game

No mention of how many teams they would need for a CCG. They'll probably try and stick with 10 teams for their CCG.

Jack Swarbrick on a 13th game (4/28):


http://espn.go.com/college-football/stor...ting-irish

(04-29-2015 06:52 PM)TerryD Wrote:  Jack Swarbrick on a 13th game (4/28):


http://espn.go.com/college-football/stor...ting-irish

I think there is a difference between a 13th game and a "Championship Game".
Bowlsby as much as said so.

(04-29-2015 06:45 PM)domer1978 Wrote:  Brett McMurphy @McMurphyESPN · 1m 1 minute ago
Big 12’s Bob Bowlsby: “What we heard is if we don’t go to a championship game we’re at a disadvantage"
4 retweets 1 favorite
Reply Retweet4 Favorite1 Follow
More
Brett McMurphy @McMurphyESPN · 5m 5 minutes ago
Bob Bowlsby “I surmise a move in that direction (toward having future Big 12 title game)”
10 retweets 3 favorites
Reply Retweet10 Favorite3 Follow
More
Brett McMurphy @McMurphyESPN · 6m 6 minutes ago
Bob Bowlsby said Jeff Long indicated “13 (games) better than 12.” If Big 12 at disadvantage Big 12 would look to add future title game

What about this one:

Quote:
Brett McMurphy @McMurphyESPN
· 2h 2 hours ago
Bill Hancock on @CFBPlayoff: "We need to emphasis more the importance of the conference championships"

(04-29-2015 06:55 PM)Dasville Wrote:  

(04-29-2015 06:52 PM)TerryD Wrote:  Jack Swarbrick on a 13th game (4/28):


http://espn.go.com/college-football/stor...ting-irish

I think there is a difference between a 13th game and a "Championship Game".
Bowlsby as much as said so.

I thought the most relevant/important part of Swarbrick's comments were this:

"Athletic director Jack Swarbrick said Tuesday he's in no rush to even consider a 13th game for the Irish, in spite of the emphasis placed on conference championship games following the first College Football Playoff".


I take that to mean that ND is not looking to join a football conference, in spite of CFP implications (He has heard the same comments from Jeff Long as Bowlsby did, presumably).

(04-29-2015 07:00 PM)Dasville Wrote:  

(04-29-2015 06:45 PM)domer1978 Wrote:  Brett McMurphy @McMurphyESPN · 1m 1 minute ago
Big 12’s Bob Bowlsby: “What we heard is if we don’t go to a championship game we’re at a disadvantage"
4 retweets 1 favorite
Reply Retweet4 Favorite1 Follow
More
Brett McMurphy @McMurphyESPN · 5m 5 minutes ago
Bob Bowlsby “I surmise a move in that direction (toward having future Big 12 title game)”
10 retweets 3 favorites
Reply Retweet10 Favorite3 Follow
More
Brett McMurphy @McMurphyESPN · 6m 6 minutes ago
Bob Bowlsby said Jeff Long indicated “13 (games) better than 12.” If Big 12 at disadvantage Big 12 would look to add future title game

What about this one:

Quote:
Brett McMurphy @McMurphyESPN
· 2h 2 hours ago
Bill Hancock on @CFBPlayoff: "We need to emphasis more the importance of the conference championships"

Money shot

Only conference champions should be eligible. Pick the best four from there. That removes some of the ambiguity. No need to argue whether the runner up in the SEC is better or not. Take that out of the committee's hands.

13th game should potentially be a flex game. Play 5 conference games on the final week of the year. 10 vs 9, 8 vs 7, 6 vs 5, 4 vs 3, 2 vs 1. Otherwise, a 13 game would mean nothing if they schedule schools like the Citadel or N. Texas. In the event of a 3 way tie, 4 vs 1 and 3 vs 2.

I would predict a 12-0 or 11-1 ND being left out of the playoffs for 13-0 and 12-1 P5 teams would probably be the final move for ND to move into a conference.

(04-29-2015 07:12 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  I would predict a 12-0 or 11-1 ND being left out of the playoffs for 13-0 and 12-1 P5 teams would probably be the final move for ND to move into a conference.

I predict that Notre Dame and the Irish would join with a group of Scotts and raid a northern English town before that happened.

(04-29-2015 07:12 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  I would predict a 12-0 or 11-1 ND being left out of the playoffs for 13-0 and 12-1 P5 teams would probably be the final move for ND to move into a conference.

"Swarbrick said that until Notre Dame is in the playoff conversation, he can't evaluate it.

"I'd like to be in the position to have to worry about that," he quipped.

"It's not that there's a 13th game," he said. "It's always going to be against a really good opponent. It's the conference championship game. It's not the aggregate number, it's who you're playing. There are going to be years where a team looks like they're going to get in and gets upset in their conference championship game and they don't get in. Did the 13th game help them? No. I'm not saying that's a reason to do it or not do it, I'm just saying one year's worth of experience with this system is way too small to draw any conclusions about how it will play out over time."

As opposed to fake tweets?

(04-29-2015 07:18 PM)USFRamenu Wrote:  

(04-29-2015 07:12 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  I would predict a 12-0 or 11-1 ND being left out of the playoffs for 13-0 and 12-1 P5 teams would probably be the final move for ND to move into a conference.

I predict that Notre Dame and the Irish would join with a group of Scotts and raid a northern English town before that happened.

Sign me up for that. As one who holds Irish citizenship and one who fell in love with Scotland after several visits, that works for me.

That is one "conference" that makes sense to me......

You are mistaken if you believe this means the big 12 will simply add a championship game. They can't and the rules wont be changed for them. Even the ACC doesn't want to remove the 12 team requirement. NO ONE is helping the big 12 in this.

All this is is Bowlsby and the big 12 setting up their excuse for dissolution. That is how it works. That is how it is working.

Another word, it you do not hold a CCG, you are screwed. It looks like the other three P5 conferences will be voting against the deregulation of the CCG. So, Big 12 and Notre Dame will be left out of the 4 playoff spots. Big 12 needs to add 2 to 6 schools and Notre Dame must join a conference to be eligible.

If the big 12 had any decent candidates for expansion that wouldn't lower the payout then they already would have done so. To think otherwise is silly. They have no expansion candidates. Their only choice after they are officially denied the ability to have a conference championship is to dissolve.

(04-29-2015 07:40 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  You are mistaken if you believe this means the big 12 will simply add a championship game. They can't and the rules wont be changed for them. Even the ACC doesn't want to remove the 12 team requirement. NO ONE is helping the big 12 in this.

All this is is Bowlsby and the big 12 setting up their excuse for dissolution. That is how it works. That is how it is working.

^^^^^ This in spades!!!! If Fox gets the B1G, the Big 12 is on the chopping block. Book it.

(04-29-2015 08:13 PM)USFRamenu Wrote:  

(04-29-2015 07:40 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  You are mistaken if you believe this means the big 12 will simply add a championship game. They can't and the rules wont be changed for them. Even the ACC doesn't want to remove the 12 team requirement. NO ONE is helping the big 12 in this.

All this is is Bowlsby and the big 12 setting up their excuse for dissolution. That is how it works. That is how it is working.

^^^^^ This in spades!!!! If Fox gets the B1G, the Big 12 is on the chopping block. Book it.

Fox has to get part of The Big Ten T1 television rights.

The act of dissolution by the big 12 indirectly voids the GoR. That much is very true. What isn't true though is that such an act takes those Universities off the hook for the responsibilities of the GoR. They may not have to give their television rights to Fox anymore but they will still be held liable for the monetary damages that the dissolution caused to Fox.

So, part of the negotiation will be getting Fox to not press for damages. They won't do that unless they get something in return. I expect to see The Big Ten adjust their T1 contracts to something similar to what the PAC does but without the BTN having T1 rights too. The fact that the PAC puts some of their strong match ups on the PAC Network shows a weakness in the PAC and why they failed to get the top programs in the big 12. They knew they had to take a shot early but they failed.

(04-29-2015 08:13 PM)USFRamenu Wrote:  

(04-29-2015 07:40 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  You are mistaken if you believe this means the big 12 will simply add a championship game. They can't and the rules wont be changed for them. Even the ACC doesn't want to remove the 12 team requirement. NO ONE is helping the big 12 in this.

All this is is Bowlsby and the big 12 setting up their excuse for dissolution. That is how it works. That is how it is working.

^^^^^ This in spades!!!! If Fox gets the B1G, the Big 12 is on the chopping block. Book it.

I would think the opposite. Once Fox gets the B1G, then they can decide on $ for a big 12 expansion. The increase in the Big 12 contract came from Fox's end not ESPN's. ESPN even agreed to alternate Tier one games for the Big 12. Fox is way more jazzed about the Big 12 then ESPN is.