Big12 getting championship game?

[Hawghiggs]

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/writer/dennis-dodd/25139160/b12-acc-get-their-way-championship-game-restrictions-to-be-relaxed-by-2016

[Inhogswetrust]

I'd bet the ACC wants it changed so they don't have to worry about getting raided again.............................It reads like a quid pro quo between the ACC and little 12.

[Hawghiggs]

 I found it interesting that Bowlsby said that a conference should be able to have a championship game no matter how big the conference was. I wonder if this will bring back the return of the 8 or 9 team conferences? I for one hope it does. I hate not playing everyone in the conference.

[jgphillips3]

I found it interesting that Bowlsby said that a conference should be able to have a championship game no matter how big the conference was. I wonder if this will bring back the return of the 8 or 9 team conferences? I for one hope it does. I hate not playing everyone in the conference.

Not ever going to happen.  Money from peddling all those teams and TV markets to TV won't allow it.  Now, I think we may get to 16 team super conferences with 8 team divisions that have a championship game as a play in game to the playoffs someday, but that is probably the only way you will see teams broken off into groups of 8 again.

[shotgun7]

If you play everyone, I don't see the sense in a championship game.... that's just me. But if you go 10-0 or whatever and then you have to play a say.... 7-3 team in the championship game, if they upset you does that really make them better? I understand that its an extra game... and it should make your SOS better but geesh, its a little lame.

[Hawghiggs]

If you play everyone, I don't see the sense in a championship game.... that's just me. But if you go 10-0 or whatever and then you have to play a say.... 7-3 team in the championship game, if they upset you does that really make them better? I understand that its an extra game... and it should make your SOS better but geesh, its a little lame.

That can happen currently also.

[Hoggish1]

Not ever going to happen.  Money from peddling all those teams and TV markets to TV won't allow it.  Now, I think we may get to 16 team super conferences with 8 team divisions that have a championship game as a play in game to the playoffs someday, but that is probably the only way you will see teams broken off into groups of 8 again.

I agree.

I see 16 team super conferences, with the two sides playing as the first round of the playoffs, leading easily (logistically) to an eight team playoff system.

In order to get rid of the conference championships (which will never happen because of the $) they have to use the CCG as part of the playoffs.  The little 12 will be forced to expand or risk not being part of the playoffs in some years as happened to them in the inaugural year of the playoff system.

[DeltaBoy]

I expect the Big 12 to add some teams if not this year by next at the latest.

[Hogwild]

I'd bet the ACC wants it changed so they don't have to worry about getting raided again.............................It reads like a quid pro quo between the ACC and little 12.

After the Maryland decision ($31 million exit fee) for a school that didn't even agree to the latest  increase in exit fee($50 million), no one is leaving the ACC for a while.

The reason the ACC is pushing this is so that conference can match-up their top two teams in the title game regardless of division winners. Which is not something that is good for Arkansas, if it passes.

[JayBell]

I like the idea of an optional conference championship game anyway.  The Big XII will rarely have a situation like it did at the end of last season, so they don't usually need a championship game.  When you play everyone the same amount of times, there's no need for an extra game.  It's like foreign soccer vs. MLS.

But, I also think there's no need to have a 1-loss team from one side of the conference play a 3-loss team from the other side.  When the situation is like it was when Alabama and Georgia played, then obviously the extra game is needed.

[Inhogswetrust]

After the Maryland decision ($31 million exit fee) for a school that didn't even agree to the latest  increase in exit fee($50 million), no one is leaving the ACC for a while.

The reason the ACC is pushing this is so that conference can match-up their top two teams in the title game regardless of division winners. Which is not something that is good for Arkansas, if it passes.

$50 million isn't what it used to be. They could amortize that over ten to twenty years and it would be negligible IF the new conference affiliation was to get them a lot more. IF the ACC wants what you mentioned then it doesn't require a change in reducing the number of members but a change in the wording as to who can play in it. It still smells of a quid pro quo to me.

[Hogwild]

$50 million isn't what it used to be. They could amortize that over ten to twenty years and it would be negligible IF the new conference affiliation was to get them a lot more. IF the ACC wants what you mentioned then it doesn't require a change in reducing the number of members but a change in the wording as to who can play in it. It still smells of a quid pro quo to me.

That's the up front fee, they won't get anything from the new conference since the ACC still owns their  TV rights.

Under this grant of rights agreement, which takes effect immediately and runs through 2026-27, schools relinquish control of broadcast rights and media rights to the ACC, including revenue for all home games, regardless of the school's affiliation. That figure could be as high as $300 million, or about $20 million a year. So a departing ACC school now brings no value to its new conference.

They ACC is attempting to match-up the "two best teams" not the division, in order to have a better shot at having the winner make the playoff.  If this rule was adopted back when championship games started, we would have missed out on two of our three SEC title games ('95 & '02)

[Inhogswetrust]

That's the up front fee, they won't get anything from the new conference since the ACC still owns their  TV rights.

I guess you've never heard of "negotiation".............................

[Jek Tono Porkins]

If you play everyone, I don't see the sense in a championship game.... that's just me. But if you go 10-0 or whatever and then you have to play a say.... 7-3 team in the championship game, if they upset you does that really make them better? I understand that its an extra game... and it should make your SOS better but geesh, its a little lame.

In addition, the loser of that extra game has the potential to get totally screwed. It has happened most recently to Georgia in 2012. They were 11-1 and ranked #3 going into the SECCG against Bama. If someone else had won the division and gone to the SECCG, Georgia was for sure going to a BCS bowl. Instead, because they barely lost to #2 Bama in an extra game, Georgia got knocked down to #6 and a bid to the Capital One Bowl.

Florida, whom Georgia had beat, was ranked #4, so because Georgia played an extra game and lost, Florida got to jump Georgia in the rankings and go the Sugar Bowl. I think that's total BS.

[Hogwild]

I guess you've never heard of "negotiation".............................

They can try to negotiate but the ACC holds all the cards, if you have the TV rights there is no reason for the ACC to.  Maryland thought the same way and the ended up paying as much as Nebraska, Texas  A&M, Colorado, TCU and Boise did combined. And that was before the ACC agreed to give all TV rights to the conference.

No conference would want to take on an ACC member, they would lose money.

[Inhogswetrust]

They can try to negotiate but the ACC holds all the cards, if you have the TV rights there is no reason for the ACC to.  Maryland thought the same way and the ended up paying as much as Nebraska, Texas  A&M, Colorado, TCU and Boise did combined. And that was before the ACC agreed to give all TV rights to the conference.

No conference would want to take on an ACC member, they would lose money.

Just because someone has a stronger position in a negotiation doesn't mean they will not always be willing to negotiate fairly. Things could always change...................they usually do.

[Inhogswetrust]

In addition, the loser of that extra game has the potential to get totally screwed. It has happened most recently to Georgia in 2012. They were 11-1 and ranked #3 going into the SECCG against Bama. If someone else had won the division and gone to the SECCG, Georgia was for sure going to a BCS bowl. Instead, because they barely lost to #2 Bama in an extra game, Georgia got knocked down to #6 and a bid to the Capital One Bowl.

Florida, whom Georgia had beat, was ranked #4, so because Georgia played an extra game and lost, Florida got to jump Georgia in the rankings and go the Sugar Bowl. I think that's total BS.

If this rule passes then there could be other possible scenario's where a team gets left out just like there are NOW. For instance how would an ACC choose between two, two loss teams to play against a one loss team? THEN a little twelve team has one loss but is higher ranked yet doesn't have to play a champ game...............Who does the committee choose? There will ALWAYS be a scenario where some team that thinks they deserve to be in the playoffs gets left out.

[EastexHawg]

I like a playoff scenario in which all power conference champions are included regardless of record.  If you win the SEC or ACC you're in even if your record is 8-4.

That would eliminate the need to play 1-A and other cupcake non-conference opponents.  A team like Arkansas or Tennessee could play a non-conference schedule of Texas, Ohio State, Southern Cal, and Georgia Tech.  Even if they lost all four, they would still be in the playoff if they won their conference.

Anything to get rid of the OOC games against the Tennessee Techs and Florida Internationals of the world is a great thing as far as I am concerned.  I have absolutely zero desire to watch those mismatches on TV, much less spend several hundred dollars to attend in person.

TV ratings, concessions, and all other revenues would be higher for interesting matchups instead of lambs being led to their slaughter.

[Inhogswetrust]

I like a playoff scenario in which all power conference champions are included regardless of record.  If you win the SEC or ACC you're in even if your record is 8-4.

That would eliminate the need to play 1-A and other cupcake non-conference opponents.  A team like Arkansas or Tennessee could play a non-conference schedule of Texas, Ohio State, Southern Cal, and Georgia Tech.  Even if they lost all four, they would still be in the playoff if they won their conference.

Anything to get rid of the OOC games against the Tennessee Techs and Florida Internationals of the world is a great thing as far as I am concerned.  I have absolutely zero desire to watch those mismatches on TV, much less spend several hundred dollars to attend in person.

TV ratings, concessions, and all other revenues would be higher for interesting matchups instead of lambs being led to their slaughter.

That doesn't give any program a NEED to get rid of lighter non conference scheduling. They STILL will need to have as good a record as possible for potential bowl games and recruiting if they don't make the playoffs................

[WayneHawg]

I expect the Big 12.  To be a weak conference for years to come!

[shotgun7]

That doesn't give any program a NEED to get rid of lighter non conference scheduling. They STILL will need to have as good a record as possible for potential bowl games and recruiting if they don't make the playoffs................

If all conf champions got a spot in the playoffs, I am assuming the playoffs would be expanded.

[OneTuskOverTheLine™]

I found it interesting that Bowlsby said that a conference should be able to have a championship game no matter how big the conference was. I wonder if this will bring back the return of the 8 or 9 team conferences? I for one hope it does. I hate not playing everyone in the conference.

There's no way Kentucky, Vandy or aTm, get dumped before we do. Maybe MIZZOU or So Cakilacky, but with two SECE championships that doesn't look good...

[OneTuskOverTheLine™]

I like a playoff scenario in which all power conference champions are included regardless of record.  If you win the SEC or ACC you're in even if your record is 8-4.

That would eliminate the need to play 1-A and other cupcake non-conference opponents.  A team like Arkansas or Tennessee could play a non-conference schedule of Texas, Ohio State, Southern Cal, and Georgia Tech.  Even if they lost all four, they would still be in the playoff if they won their conference.

Anything to get rid of the OOC games against the Tennessee Techs and Florida Internationals of the world is a great thing as far as I am concerned.  I have absolutely zero desire to watch those mismatches on TV, much less spend several hundred dollars to attend in person.

TV ratings, concessions, and all other revenues would be higher for interesting matchups instead of lambs being led to their slaughter.

Yes and No... Dude you and I are so close on agreeing it's like two notes in music... The closer they are to intonation without getting there the worse it sounds. I think those cupcakes are needed to tune up your team, but I will concede the possibility that what you say MAY BE right... Catch me on a night w/out Ezra Brooks running through my veins and I may agree with you...  lol..!

[Hawghiggs]

There's no way Kentucky, Vandy or aTm, get dumped before we do. Maybe MIZZOU or So Cakilacky, but with two SECE championships that doesn't look good...

I don't think we would get dumped. But I could see a scenario where we help form a new conference.

[Inhogswetrust]

If all conf champions got a spot in the playoffs, I am assuming the playoffs would be expanded.

I doubt it happens like that. Even if expanded to one additional round that's only 8 teams and there aren't enough conferences for that unless the conference champ games become a "defacto" first round playoff. They STILL would need as good a record for other bowls. The bowls are NOT going away.