No, it’s not… but when you’re gonna combine division play with round robin scheduling, I don’t suppose it really matters.
Filed under Big 12 Football
Anything that’ll get your two top teams playing on that last Saturday.
How does using the prior year’s results for the current year’s seedings manage that, pray tell?
I meant the championship game Saturday. Sry if unclear. They don’t want to be out of sight/out of mind that day & get leapfrogged like Baylor and TCU did coupla years ago.
They figure it will result in Oklahoma and TCU in different divisions every year. That said, the whole idea is stupid.
Another example of how this silly playoff setup is negatively affecting the game.
Change is not always bad.
But neither is something good or better just because it’s novel.
I do not the playoff set up as it stands now hurting the game. You still need to win your conference….
One huge appeal of college football, as opposed to the NFL, is the regional rivalries and traditional conference rivalries. For example, I would rather play Auburn and Tech each year, even if playing Texas A & M every year and Auburn on occasion and replacing Tech with random Power 5 teams, a different one each year.
Playing those guys means a lot to me. Beating those guys means even more to me, much more so than beating Missouri.
This Big 12 crap is an example of taking a perfectly good method of handling the regular season and adding something meaningless in order to impress ESPN’s silly committee.
Remind me again how a round robin where everybody plays everybody doesn’t settle it on the field?
The biggest problem I have with a round-robin schedule determining a conference champion has to do with the how teams change and often improve during the course of a season.
This year Oklahoma and TCU play each other on October 1st – in the first 1/3 of the season. If they end the season the two best teams and their records are tied, the tie breaker would be whoever won that Oct. 1 game between them. How is this better than making them play again in a true Conference Championship after the regular season is over? Especially when it’s very possible and likely that the teams will end the season (for better or worse) very differently than they began it.
This year Oklahoma and TCU play each other on October 1st – in the first 1/3 of the season. If they end the season the two best teams and their records are tied, the tie breaker would be whoever won that Oct. 1 game between them. How is this better than making them play again in a true Conference Championship after the regular season is over?
Huh? If they already played each other – why do we need a do-over? One team already beat the other on the field. You had your chance and failed. Them’s the breaks, but you can’t argue it wasn’t a fair opportunity since you got to play each other.
I guess you didn’t like LSU and Alabama playing again in the BCS either. lol (….which I did like, very very much)
I hated it … LSU beat them fair and square in T-town.
I hated it. Alabama had its chance (IN T-TOWN NO LESS) and blew it. LSU got screwed harshly that year.
Worst championship game ever in my opinion. LSU and Bama were both great teams that season. LSU had to beat Bama twice to win the national championship but Bama only had to beat LSU once. If we are going to allow rematches in any sort of championship, there needs to be a best of 3 rule. LSU should have gotten another game against Bama after the BCS game if they really wanted to be fair.
A 3 round, single elimination, 8 conference champion playoff with no committee or polls and an 11 game regular season to determine a national champion solves all the problems.
I get the argument that LSU deserved some respect for beating Bama in Tuscaloosa. But the “optics”, as they say, were bad for LSU. They beat Bama in OT 9-6. Not exactly a resoundingly convincing win.
….and if they wanted to make a case for it all being so unfair, maybe they should’ve tried scoring at all in the National Championship instead of getting embarrassed 21-0.
I get the argument that teams change, but if we’re going to discount a September game for a November game because you weren’t playing as well then; what’s the point of even having a regular season?
Or someone had a key injury in one of the two games.
This scenario makes a lot if sense given the B12’s predicament and the simple gravity of playoffs.
And yes, that speaks to the complete absurdity of the B12 specifically and the management of the college game in general.
I mean – yeah, the simple answer is they’re doing it for money. They don’t really give a shit how fans feel about fairness.
It obviously could never happen because the number of games aren’t possible in college football, but the European soccer leagues have the fairest system for determining their champion. To wit – the English Premier League has 20 teams. Everybody plays each other twice (once home and once away) for a total of 38 games. The schedules are split such that you play each team once during the first half of the season and once during the latter half of the season (thus mitigating the variables of hot streaks / injury to key players). Points are awarded based on W-L-D (3-0-1). Most points at end of season is champion. Perfectly fair process attained.
Yeah, except soccer is dumb.
Yeah, well, you know, that’s just, like, your opinion, man.
There is the distinct possibility that I hate soccer because I suck at it.
Your bug is my feature. I like the fact that the entire season matters. I don’t like when a 9-7 2011 NY Giants team even gets a chance to make the playoffs. At the end of the 2007 season, I don’t think anyone could have beaten UGA, but I wasn’t upset when they didn’t make the Championship game. Too bad they couldn’t take care of a 6-6 USCe, or not get waxed by UT. Unfortunately for me, I think the game is going more towards the 2001 Giants, and the game will mean less and less to me.
Remind me again how a round robin where everybody plays everybody >doesn’t settle it on the field?
Remind me again how a round robin where everybody plays everybody without a Conference Championship maximizes revenue and per-team distribution.
Ding ding ding.
What a stupid idea!!! Bob Bowlsby would screw a one-car funeral.
SSDD. Here’s the deal. A true, uncontested national champion for college football is not possible. Ever. Period.
Every ncaa and conference administrator and ESPN will somehow believe that they can get that square peg in the round hole, but it just can’t happen.
Truthfully, they’ll just keep maximizing the money flow.
An inside source tells me one administrator at the meeting raised his hand and asked, “How will this proposal help the children?”. The room broke-out into raucous laughter and the meeting was quickly adjourned.
Subscribe in a reader