CFP expansion discussion

[camel at sea 589]

Should be interesting to see which of SMU, Houston, Tech, TCU, and Baylor make the 12 team playoff first and then most often.  

[Askew 362]

2 hours ago, ButtFumble said:

GTFO

if this happens the first thing the Big 12 needs to do is play fewer fucking conference games and give the members the chance to get 10 (or better yet 20) fucking wins without guaranteeing losses

every conference game equals 1-1.....one fucking win and a GUARANTEED LOSS.....every OOC game means the chance to get a win without also taking that guaranteed loss

 

First off, hold your horses--we literally cannot play fewer conference games right now. It's a 10-team conference round robin.  We either expand or continue 9 games. 

Second, youre misunderstanding my point a bit. I'm not saying bring in bad teams. I'm saying bring in teams. Hopefully that would mean 2-4 of Utah, Colorado, Nebraska, Mizzou, Arizona, Arizona St. 

And I pointed out the zero-sum problem in my post. The Big 12 has that the worst of any conference right now. 

But cross-division games are almost like an OOC. Bama playing Vandy assures them a win, and the SEC West doesn't otherwise take a loss. So the SEC West teams that Bama plays all year are all ranked better. There can be years where Bama, Auburn, and LSU are all 10-win teams, along with Florida and Georgia in the east. Same thing goes in the Big 10. Ohio St, Michigan, Penn st, Wisconsin, Iowa all magically find themselves around 10 wins. 

It's literally not possible in the Big 12. There arent enough available wins in the round robin format. It's fine if the goal is get one team to the CFP. It sucks if you want more top-15 teams. 

 

 

[Hurtlocker 2208]

7 hours ago, Machinator said:

The Big 12 doesn't really need to expand at all.   If we average out the last 7 years, which seems relatively fair, this is the percent of the conference that has been in the playoffs:

Big Ten = 20.4%

SEC = 19.3%

Big 12 = 17.1%

Pac 12 = 13.1%

ACC = 11.2%

AAC =  7.7%

To match the Big Ten's 20%, the Big 12 just needed to put two more teams into the playoff over 7 years.   That's not really a massive issue you change everything to accomplish.  And, if you expand, do you actually increase the odds?   The Big Ten got nearly twice the teams into the playoffs than the Big 12, but they still only put 20% of their total teams in, a 15% difference.  

Considering the money will most likely be split evenly still between the P5, if you increase size for more spots, but same percentage, you're really just diluting your payout.

 

 

Edited June 11, 2021 by Hurtlocker

[ButtFumble 5158]

2 hours ago, Askew said:

First off, hold your horses--we literally cannot play fewer conference games right now. It's a 10-team conference round robin.  We either expand or continue 9 games. 

Second, youre misunderstanding my point a bit. I'm not saying bring in bad teams. I'm saying bring in teams. Hopefully that would mean 2-4 of Utah, Colorado, Nebraska, Mizzou, Arizona, Arizona St. 

And I pointed out the zero-sum problem in my post. The Big 12 has that the worst of any conference right now. 

But cross-division games are almost like an OOC. Bama playing Vandy assures them a win, and the SEC West doesn't otherwise take a loss. So the SEC West teams that Bama plays all year are all ranked better. There can be years where Bama, Auburn, and LSU are all 10-win teams, along with Florida and Georgia in the east. Same thing goes in the Big 10. Ohio St, Michigan, Penn st, Wisconsin, Iowa all magically find themselves around 10 wins. 

It's literally not possible in the Big 12. There arent enough available wins in the round robin format. It's fine if the goal is get one team to the CFP. It sucks if you want more top-15 teams. 

 

 

the Big 12 does not have to play a full conference round robin......the Big 12 can also split into two divisions ("as equally matched as possible" which for the NCAA means the number of teams not strength of teams) and they can play a CCG with the winners of the divisions having to play in the CCG

the NCAA rule gives you a choice.....full conference round robin and match the two best teams or split into even divisions (or divisions only unequal by one if you have an uneven number of teams in the conference) and then you must match the division winners in the CCG

the Big 12 right now is the only conference besides The Sunbelt (also 10 teams) that realistically has the option to hold their CCG with either format.....the AAC could if they wanted to play 10 conference games, but they also have a 2 year waiver until they have to add a team so they can match their two best teams in the CCG because of that waiver without a full conference round robin......the PAC 12 could if they played 11 conference games, but even the PAC 12 is not that dumb 9in fact most coaches in the PAC 12 know that 9 conference games is killing them as the study showed that used the PAC 12 for the study).....the PAC 12 was stuck with larry scott though that was worried about "content" instead of QUALITY of content and that was too dumb to know that even in OOC games the home team owns the rights to having a home and home two years in a row with two conference teams is the same total content as those two conference members having a home and home with two OOC teams

none of the teams you mentioned are available to the Big 12 and it is highly highly highly unlikely they will be in the future

if the Big 12 was split:

Texas, Texas Tech, WVU, Baylor, ISU

OU, OkState, KU, TCU, KSU

that would be equal in terms of number of teams for the NCAA and it would be very equal in terms of strength of divisions for the conference as a whole

each team plays a protected "rival" above and below to Texas/OU. Tech/OkState, KU/WVU (it ism what it is), Baylor, TCU, ISU/KSU

all major rivalries are protected that way.....yes OkState misses Texas, yes TCU is in the "non-Texas" division, yes ISU misses KU annually, and you can say Tech and Baylor miss OU

but playing SEVEN conference games you play the 4 from your division, your protected rival, and then a pair for the remaining four every two years home and home

The Big 12 would still play each other more frequently than any other conference, the Big 12 would not have about the same % chance of a CCG rematch as the PAC 12 (playing 9 games) .778% Big 12 vs .75% PAC 12

with that alignment and the current strength of those teams and the historical strength of them it would be very likely the Big 12 would have two very good teams in the CCG and possibly as many as two other teams with very good records (one in each division or possibly even two in one division) also looking at a chance for the CCG

as far as "content" goes say Baylor plays KU home and home with the stupid 9 game schedule now....that is one game each year for the media partners.....if instead Baylor plays Wake Forest home and home for two years with the home game for Baylor the first year and KU plays Oregon State home and home playing away at Oregon State the first year.....well the Big 12 owns the Baylor Wake game the first year (one game) and the Big 12 owns the KU Oregon State game the second year (one game) for a total of two games over 2 years.....the same exact number as Baylor playing KU two years in a row

and those games are at least as "exciting" as Baylor vs KU and since they will mostly draw as many if not more "casual Big 12 fans" and they will draw Wake Forest and Oregon State fans and possibly a few "causal PAC 12 or ACC fans" well the media partners are getting "free eyeballs"......because next to no one outside of very hard cosr "casual Big 12 fans" and Baylor and KU fans are tuning in for Baylor KU as it is now

even if Baylor and KU went .500 in those games each year that is still probably a new win for the conference because it was the same .500% against P5 teams, but one was at least out of conference for better "eyeball test" for the conference.....if they went .75% well that is a hell of a lot better.....and depending on what is going on even if they went .500, but they won both one year and lost both one year that year with 2 wins OOC could help the Big 12 a lot and yes there is a chance the year with two OOC losses could hurt a lot.....but that is where you need your top teams to step it up no matter what the lower tier teams do

over time if the Big 12 can get their lower tier teams winning better than 50% of those games especially the P5 OOC games and over time if the Big 12 can win a very high % of any G5 OOC games that helps the lower tier teams the most in terms of recruiting, bowl games and extra practice and in terms of going into the next season and it helps the conference in terms of looking the best at the end of the year and thus being thought of better to start the next year

the Big 12 can easily guarantee the media partners they will have at least 2 OOC P5 games in the schedule (though you have to trust ESPN will not play games and try and get the SEC SEC SEC and ACC to limit those chances for the Big 12 which is a stretch) and there could be a bonus system for three or more OOC P5 games......the Big 12 as it is has pretty much every team except a couple playing 10 P5 games and some play 11 like WVU in 2021 and Texas in the recent past

it is right there for the Big 12 to reach out and take and play the system the way that is the best for the Big 12, but people cannot get past the long gone idea of "conference games just mean more" and get with the idea of fucking wins (even over dog shit) mean more than "good losses" especially "good conference losses" (which are the worst losses for a conference)

[Bama Llama 1447]

I'm in for the funky, rarely if ever seen before, on campus first round games with high schadenfreude potential, e.g.: Last year - Oregon @ Aggie, UGA @ Cincinnati, Indiana @ Gators; 2019 - Gators @ Wisconsin; 2018 - LSU @ Buckeyes, Gators @ Michigan, UDub @ UCF; 2017 - The U @ Auburn; 2016 - USC @ Wisconsin (song girls cavorting in nipply weather - mmmm).

[jw4381 3063]

Something something girls and nipples. 

[Zeus 5950]

5 hours ago, ButtFumble said:

the Big 12 does not have to play a full conference round robin......the Big 12 can also split into two divisions ("as equally matched as possible" which for the NCAA means the number of teams not strength of teams) and they can play a CCG with the winners of the divisions having to play in the CCG

the NCAA rule gives you a choice.....full conference round robin and match the two best teams or split into even divisions (or divisions only unequal by one if you have an uneven number of teams in the conference) and then you must match the division winners in the CCG

the Big 12 right now is the only conference besides The Sunbelt (also 10 teams) that realistically has the option to hold their CCG with either format.....the AAC could if they wanted to play 10 conference games, but they also have a 2 year waiver until they have to add a team so they can match their two best teams in the CCG because of that waiver without a full conference round robin......the PAC 12 could if they played 11 conference games, but even the PAC 12 is not that dumb 9in fact most coaches in the PAC 12 know that 9 conference games is killing them as the study showed that used the PAC 12 for the study).....the PAC 12 was stuck with larry scott though that was worried about "content" instead of QUALITY of content and that was too dumb to know that even in OOC games the home team owns the rights to having a home and home two years in a row with two conference teams is the same total content as those two conference members having a home and home with two OOC teams

none of the teams you mentioned are available to the Big 12 and it is highly highly highly unlikely they will be in the future

if the Big 12 was split:

Texas, Texas Tech, WVU, Baylor, ISU

OU, OkState, KU, TCU, KSU

that would be equal in terms of number of teams for the NCAA and it would be very equal in terms of strength of divisions for the conference as a whole

each team plays a protected "rival" above and below to Texas/OU. Tech/OkState, KU/WVU (it ism what it is), Baylor, TCU, ISU/KSU

all major rivalries are protected that way.....yes OkState misses Texas, yes TCU is in the "non-Texas" division, yes ISU misses KU annually, and you can say Tech and Baylor miss OU

but playing SEVEN conference games you play the 4 from your division, your protected rival, and then a pair for the remaining four every two years home and home

The Big 12 would still play each other more frequently than any other conference, the Big 12 would not have about the same % chance of a CCG rematch as the PAC 12 (playing 9 games) .778% Big 12 vs .75% PAC 12

with that alignment and the current strength of those teams and the historical strength of them it would be very likely the Big 12 would have two very good teams in the CCG and possibly as many as two other teams with very good records (one in each division or possibly even two in one division) also looking at a chance for the CCG

as far as "content" goes say Baylor plays KU home and home with the stupid 9 game schedule now....that is one game each year for the media partners.....if instead Baylor plays Wake Forest home and home for two years with the home game for Baylor the first year and KU plays Oregon State home and home playing away at Oregon State the first year.....well the Big 12 owns the Baylor Wake game the first year (one game) and the Big 12 owns the KU Oregon State game the second year (one game) for a total of two games over 2 years.....the same exact number as Baylor playing KU two years in a row

and those games are at least as "exciting" as Baylor vs KU and since they will mostly draw as many if not more "casual Big 12 fans" and they will draw Wake Forest and Oregon State fans and possibly a few "causal PAC 12 or ACC fans" well the media partners are getting "free eyeballs"......because next to no one outside of very hard cosr "casual Big 12 fans" and Baylor and KU fans are tuning in for Baylor KU as it is now

even if Baylor and KU went .500 in those games each year that is still probably a new win for the conference because it was the same .500% against P5 teams, but one was at least out of conference for better "eyeball test" for the conference.....if they went .75% well that is a hell of a lot better.....and depending on what is going on even if they went .500, but they won both one year and lost both one year that year with 2 wins OOC could help the Big 12 a lot and yes there is a chance the year with two OOC losses could hurt a lot.....but that is where you need your top teams to step it up no matter what the lower tier teams do

over time if the Big 12 can get their lower tier teams winning better than 50% of those games especially the P5 OOC games and over time if the Big 12 can win a very high % of any G5 OOC games that helps the lower tier teams the most in terms of recruiting, bowl games and extra practice and in terms of going into the next season and it helps the conference in terms of looking the best at the end of the year and thus being thought of better to start the next year

the Big 12 can easily guarantee the media partners they will have at least 2 OOC P5 games in the schedule (though you have to trust ESPN will not play games and try and get the SEC SEC SEC and ACC to limit those chances for the Big 12 which is a stretch) and there could be a bonus system for three or more OOC P5 games......the Big 12 as it is has pretty much every team except a couple playing 10 P5 games and some play 11 like WVU in 2021 and Texas in the recent past

it is right there for the Big 12 to reach out and take and play the system the way that is the best for the Big 12, but people cannot get past the long gone idea of "conference games just mean more" and get with the idea of fucking wins (even over dog shit) mean more than "good losses" especially "good conference losses" (which are the worst losses for a conference)

they made a whole commercial about "toughest road" with lasers and everything, can't go back on that now

[Treefidy 1463]

8 hours ago, Askew said:

First off, hold your horses--we literally cannot play fewer conference games right now. It's a 10-team conference round robin.  We either expand or continue 9 games. 

Second, youre misunderstanding my point a bit. I'm not saying bring in bad teams. I'm saying bring in teams. Hopefully that would mean 2-4 of Utah, Colorado, Nebraska, Mizzou, Arizona, Arizona St. 

And I pointed out the zero-sum problem in my post. The Big 12 has that the worst of any conference right now. 

But cross-division games are almost like an OOC. Bama playing Vandy assures them a win, and the SEC West doesn't otherwise take a loss. So the SEC West teams that Bama plays all year are all ranked better. There can be years where Bama, Auburn, and LSU are all 10-win teams, along with Florida and Georgia in the east. Same thing goes in the Big 10. Ohio St, Michigan, Penn st, Wisconsin, Iowa all magically find themselves around 10 wins. 

It's literally not possible in the Big 12. There arent enough available wins in the round robin format. It's fine if the goal is get one team to the CFP. It sucks if you want more top-15 teams. 

 

 

Then how about one up the SEC model, go to 2 divisions of 5, play 7 conference games, bring in a bunch of sisters of the poor in late October AND late November for those 4 and 5th OOC games, then profit when most of the conference ends with 10+ wins

[Sbbruin 21737]

11 hours ago, Askew said:

Second, youre misunderstanding my point a bit. I'm not saying bring in bad teams. I'm saying bring in teams. Hopefully that would mean 2-4 of Utah, Colorado, Nebraska, Mizzou, Arizona, Arizona St. 

 

Oh here we go with conference realignment again.  So what happens to the Pac in your scenario?  It disbands?  

[LTbear 4161]

9 hours ago, ButtFumble said:

the Big 12 does not have to play a full conference round robin.....

The Big XII DOES have to play a full round robin if they want enough Big XII conference game inventory to get a fat check from our media partners. Guaranteed conference games are worth more in media contracts than OOC games that may be 1) shit teams or 2) on another team's home field. 

['stache 21774]

46 minutes ago, Sbbruin said:

Oh here we go with conference realignment again.  So what happens to the Pac in your scenario?  It disbands?  

You'll take Boise and BYU and you'll like it mister!

['stache 21774]

I guess 12 would work as long as they change second round games to home fields of the top 4 seeds. Most of them will be 80K-100k+ stadiums. Makes a ton of sense. So of course they are going to fuck it all up.

[ButtFumble 5158]

25 minutes ago, LTbear said:

The Big XII DOES have to play a full round robin if they want enough Big XII conference game inventory to get a fat check from our media partners. Guaranteed conference games are worth more in media contracts than OOC games that may be 1) shit teams or 2) on another team's home field. 

this is living in pretend land

1. Baylor plays KU home and home for two years....that is one game a year and two games total that the media partners own.....and lets not pretend that is some massively valuable game even when Baylor is good

or Baylor play Wake Forest home year one and on the road year two and KU plays Oregon State at Oregon State year one and at home year two......guess what that is still one game per year and two games total that the Big 12 media partners own

and non one with common sense really places a lower value on those OOC games in fact when you consider you will capture the causal fans of the Big 12 and the ACC or PAC 12 you probably have more fans tuning in overall vs just another insular Big 12 circle jerk

2. if the members of the Big 12 can actually put WORK into crafting a proper schedule and the Big 12 can get to a point where there are next to no teams that are 2-10 or 1-11 and the worst teams are 5-7 or perhaps even the worst team is 6-6 well that makes the conference games you do have a whole lot less shitty

3. every OOC game does not have to be total shit the Big 12 has pretty much every team every year with an exception of generally one every so often playing at least one P5 OOC and some play two (like WVU this year).....so the Big 12 can still get plenty of OOC games......EVERY TEAM does not need to have 10 P5 games or even 9 for that matter because the goal is to get some teams a little traction instead of serving to be Big 12 "win fodder" and perpetual shit.......that does not mean they schedule total shit in the OOC either

4. the Big 12 can make deals with the media partners for payment for OOC P5 games (again you have to watch for ESPN to not work with other conferences to try and fuck that up to save money or to protect the conferences they fully own like the SEC SEC SEC and ACC)

the conference can also make scheduling requirements for revenues shares.....9 P5 games in the schedule (so 2 P5 OOC) gets you your full share....8 gets you a bit less.....if they work it with the media partners then 10 or 11 gets you a bonus.....but perhaps an AD has done the math and has decided that an additional home game against a G5 opponent and only having 8 P5 games in the schedule works for his program because of the added ticket sales and because his program needs to start getting 6 wins and going to bowl games instead of having 3 or 4 wins year in and year out ans selling 21,324 tickets at low low low prices

5. that is another issue with the Big 12 and the 9 game with only 10 teams circle jerk.....if you do not want to rely on Kansas having "10 P5 games to make the conference look good" even though they got the shit kicked out of them in 8 of those games....well here is an idea make it where fucking Kansas is not on the schedule every fucking year with a really shitty record and place a team on YOUR SCHEDULE that is LESS SHITTY THAN KANSAS (no offense Kansas, but fucking A)

then hopefully in 3 years when Kansas had had 7 home games and beaten some shitty teams for some wins and Kansas is coming off a 7 win season with a bowl win and they are on your schedule they are a whole lot less shitty

 

I agree there is a CHANCE that some teams in the Big 12 and their ADs would take the total shit approach and schedule all garbage and hope to sneak in the playoffs by winning the conference.....but there are ways to protect against that contractually and financially and there are ways to approach the media partners to show them you will produce and perform and you are willing to put money on the line to show it 

Edited June 11, 2021 by ButtFumble

[conVINCEd 21468]

Taking a bunch of kids from Florida who have never seen snow in their lives to Michigan in January seems like a totally fair way to determine who is the better football team.

[LTbear 4161]

4 minutes ago, ButtFumble said:

this is living in pretend land

1. Baylor plays KU home and home for two years....that is one game a year and two games total that the media partners own.....and lets not pretend that is some massively valuable game even when Baylor is good

or Baylor play Wake Forest home year one and on the road year two and KU plays Oregon State at Oregon State year one and at home year two......guess what that is still one game per year and two games total that the Big 12 media partners own

and non one with common sense really places a lower value on those OOC games in fact when you consider you will capture the causal fans of the Big 12 and the ACC or PAC 12 you probably have more fans tuning in overall vs just another insular Big 12 circle jerk

2. if the members of the Big 12 can actually put WORK into crafting a proper schedule and the Big 12 can get to a point where there are next to no teams that are 2-10 or 1-11 and the worst teams are 5-7 or perhaps even the worst team is 6-6 well that makes the conference games you do have a whole lot less shitty

3. every OOC game does not have to be total shit the Big 12 has pretty much every team every year with an exception of generally one every so often playing at least one P5 OOC and some play two (like WVU this year).....so the Big 12 can still get plenty of OOC games......EVERY TEAM does not need to have 10 P5 games or even 9 for that matter because the goal is to get some teams a little traction instead of serving to be Big 12 "win fodder" and perpetual shit.......that does not mean they schedule total shit in the OOC either

4. the Big 12 can make deals with the media partners for payment for OOC P5 games 0again you have to watch for ESPN to not work with other conferences to try and fuck that up to save money or to protect the conferences they fully own like the SEC SEC SEC and ACC)

the conference can also make scheduling requirements for revenues shares.....9 P5 games in the schedule (so 2 P5 OOC) gets you your full share....8 gets you a bit less.....if they work it with the media partners then 10 or 11 gets you a bonus

 

I agree there is a CHANCE that some teams in the Big 12 and their ADs would take the total shit approach and schedule all garbage and hope to sneak in the playoffs by winning the conference.....but there are ways to protect against that contractually and financially and there are ways to approach the media partners to show them you will produce and perform and you are willing to put money on the line to show it 

This is pretend land. Guaranteed Big XII conference matchups are more valuable when negotiating media deals for years down the road.

[ButtFumble 5158]

2 minutes ago, LTbear said:

This is pretend land. Guaranteed Big XII conference matchups are more valuable when negotiating media deals for years down the road.

yes that is why the SEC SEC SEC that plays total shit for most of their teams in the OOC including late season D1-AA shit to game the rankings is about to be the highest paid P5 conference......and their 'tier 1" deal for 15 games and a CCG might pay 50% more than the Big 12 gets for tier 1 and 2

or perhaps it is because the SEC SEC SEC beats total shit and then their conference games look a hell of a lot better and they play D1-AA shit late in the year to move up in the rankings as other conferences beat up on each other....and then they end the season with more teams ranked and ranked higher....and then they start the next year with more ranked teams and teams ranked higher....and repeat over and over year in and year out

and no one in the SEC SEC SEC gives a fuck what Vanderbilt does or what SC does or what Kentucky did when they sucked.....because often times those teams are not on their schedule or teams like Alabama have no issue getting one good P5 OOC game a year to point to and say "well there it is"

pretend land is that most of the USA cares about 10 teams having a 9 game circle jerk and telling everyone how much better that cause everyone touched everyone elses dick and you are not a true champion if you did not touch all the other dicks

[ButtFumble 5158]

12 minutes ago, conVINCEd said:

Taking a bunch of kids from Florida who have never seen snow in their lives to Michigan in January seems like a totally fair way to determine who is the better football team.

well maybe fucking Florida should try scheduling a game outside of fucking Florida every once in a while

[LTbear 4161]

4 minutes ago, ButtFumble said:

yes that is why the SEC SEC SEC that plays total shit for most of their teams in the OOC including late season D1-AA shit to game the rankings is about to be the highest paid P5 conference......and their 'tier 1" deal for 15 games and a CCG might pay 50% more than the Big 12 gets for tier 1 and 2

or perhaps it is because the SEC SEC SEC beats total shit and then their conference games look a hell of a lot better and they play D1-AA shit late in the year to move up in the rankings as other conferences beat up on each other....and then they end the season with more teams ranked and ranked higher....and then they start the next year with more ranked teams and teams ranked higher....and repeat over and over year in and year out

and no one in the SEC SEC SEC gives a fuck what Vanderbilt does or what SC does or what Kentucky did when they sucked.....because often times those teams are not on their schedule or teams like Alabama have no issue getting one good P5 OOC game a year to point to and say "well there it is"

pretend land is that most of the USA cares about 10 teams having a 9 game circle jerk and telling everyone how much better that cause everyone touched everyone elses dick and you are not a true champion if you did not touch all the other dicks

You're equating thing that you know aren't equal then throwing a long-ass garble of nonsense as defense. Conference games are worth more on media contracts. Why this fact twists your panties so much, I don't know.

[BabaYaga 15212]

1 hour ago, Sbbruin said:

Oh here we go with conference realignment again.  So what happens to the Pac in your scenario?  It disbands?  

[ButtFumble 5158]

20 minutes ago, LTbear said:

You're equating thing that you know aren't equal then throwing a long-ass garble of nonsense as defense. Conference games are worth more on media contracts. Why this fact twists your panties so much, I don't know.

because there is really nothing that supports that and there is nothing other than the will to make smart decisions and to go against yesteryear thinking that prevents the Big 12 from taking control of the conference away from ESPN and what they want (which is not really giving a shit about what is best for the Big 12, but just making money) and doing what is best for the Big 12 and seeing the long term benefits of that which would include financial benefits \

I know that Texas OU was a big deal when it was an OOC game for each....probably actually a bigger deal back them

I know that Miami vs Florida and Florida vs FSU is a big deal when they play.....I know that Iowa vs ISU is a big deal.....I know that UGA vs GT is a big deal....I know that Clemson vs SC is a big deal....I know a lot of casual fans will tune in to see OU vs NU this year even at a shitty time I know that ND does very well on their own playing a lot of big names they are not in a conference with....I know that BYU gets looked as at a P5 and gets as much or more money on their own than any G5 conference gets per member and in the recent past they got more

none of that is nonsense it is simple facts....I know a lot of casual fans would tune in to see Texas vs aggy....simple facts

here are a few more...I know WVU would love to get Pitt, Syracuse, Penn State, Maryland, and VT back on their schedule and I know they would probably beat them more often than not and I know it would help their recruiting more so than coming to Texas more frequently or to the mid-west

Edited June 11, 2021 by ButtFumble

[TXSooner518 2432]

38 minutes ago, 'stache said:

I guess 12 would work as long as they change second round games to home fields of the top 4 seeds. Most of them will be 80K-100k+ stadiums. Makes a ton of sense. So of course they are going to fuck it all up.

If you look at the retrospective brackets with this model, it does look really good. Bill Connelly has an excellent one up where he looks at the % chances various teams make the semis, etc. The 5-12 teams aren't all total fodder, there are a lot of solid teams that either got a bad break (really good McCaffery-led Stanford that lost a 9am body clock game week 1; dominant tOSU team that dropped a rainy slog to Sparty) or turned it on late (for example lots of people mentioned OU playing hot at the end of the year last year). Adding home atmosphere to those games will be must-watch. 

Houston at Georgia in an opening round game, to pick a rando example, is sooooooo much more exciting to me as a fan than Houston vs Georgia in a random Peach or Fiesta Bowl that ultimately means nothing.

Adding home field to the quarters so you get top 8 teams playing each other on campus is so sexy, they simply must get it done. The traveling is just stupid otherwise. Everyone is all-in for Penn State at Alabama. Penn State vs Bama in the natty QF in Glendale is gonna be held in front of 30k people, 20k+ being corporate jabronis who got tickets b/c of affiliation with Capital One or whatever the fuck.  Bama fans as a 1 seed aren't paying thousands to travel to a fucking QF game, and will be presuming they will be in the SF or natty and will prep for that. 

[kopp0e 1135]

5 hours ago, Zeus said:

they made a whole commercial about "toughest road" with lasers and everything, can't go back on that now

Now "Every Game Matters" with new & improved CFP recipe..? https://ispot.tv/a/dphG

[WhatTheBuck 28713]

What this thread needs is more tweets from Machinator. Can’t even capture them all.

[Huckleberry 32703]

4 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

What this thread needs is more tweets from Machinator. Can’t even capture them all.

You could start your own thread about it and then everyone who appreciates your contributions more than his contributions could post in there.

[Royale with cheese 1460]

15 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

You could start your own thread about it and then everyone who appreciates your contributions more than his contributions could post in there.

* * * crickets * * *

[Zeus 5950]

Hey the machine scrapes twitter for us people who don't have a twitter I appreciate it!

[camel at sea 589]

1 hour ago, LTbear said:

You're equating thing that you know aren't equal then throwing a long-ass garble of nonsense as defense. Conference games are worth more on media contracts. Why this fact twists your panties so much, I don't know.

Yep.  The SEC's conference games are worth more than the in-league games of the Big 12.  This gives them the ability to only play 8 instead of 9 without falling behind.  As a result, then they can game the system w/ OOC schedule and build themselves up even farther.  

The Big 12 can do what the ACC is doing and try to play fewer conference games to build up our brands with inflated records... but our inventory is not worth as much, so we're going to be in a financial hole (like the ACC) if we try it.  

[WhatTheBuck 28713]

1 hour ago, Huckleberry said:

You could start your own thread about it and then everyone who appreciates your contributions more than his contributions could post in there.

I’ve probably started fewer threads than that and definitely posted fewer tweets. (There was an even longer string that came after that.) But when I post, I mostly post my own thoughts, not someone else’s. That’s Phlegm level of spewing output. How many of those were original thoughts and not just someone else’s tweets?

Edited June 11, 2021 by WhatTheBuck

[ButtFumble 5158]

1 hour ago, camel at sea said:

Yep.  The SEC's conference games are worth more than the in-league games of the Big 12.  This gives them the ability to only play 8 instead of 9 without falling behind.  As a result, then they can game the system w/ OOC schedule and build themselves up even farther.  

The Big 12 can do what the ACC is doing and try to play fewer conference games to build up our brands with inflated records... but our inventory is not worth as much, so we're going to be in a financial hole (like the ACC) if we try it.  

I am not going to argue the value of the SEC SEC SEC vs The Big 12, but I will say "why is that" and in my opinion it is because they do all they can to make sure as many of their teams stay out of the 1-11 and 2-10 range and more of them to stay in the 5-7/7-5 range and make bowl games and that makes a difference

now to the ACC they are low paid for a number of reasons:

1. they slow rolled adding teams and thus they got to a point where they were having to ask ESPN for more money for a single team after just negotiating a contract and after getting more value for ND and their 5 games and Olympic sports.....they value just kept declining because ESPN was not just going to throw a full share PLUS more money for 13 other teams and a new team

2. the insistence on the insider deal with Raycom for some 3rd tier content because "sly swo" had his son working there

3. next they got chumped by ESPN on the conference network they wanted one so badly and ESPN slow rolled them to reduce the cost of taking back that 3rd tier content and to get the ACC and sly swo all eager to make the network happen to match the SEC SEC SEC.....but it was too late ESPN had already crammed the SECn and the LHN and there was starting to be push back on more cramming.....plus they made the horrible extension into the mid 2030s to get it

I say their value has more to do with the above and making slow moves, "insider" demands and getting chumped by ESPN on the ACCn

BUT one can look at the PAC 12.....the PAC 12 has a deal that pays them on average $20 million per year per team just like the Big 12.....but more importantly the PAC 12 did not go to 9 conference games to make that deal happen the PAC 12 went to 9 conference games to make more content for their shitty PAC12n.....and no one gives a fuck about that content and places ZERO value on it for the most part.....yes I know they cover production cost and toss a few million per member, but they got lucky and there were a few cable MSOs that still had the attitude of "add more channels, pad the bill for the cost and profits and fuck the consumer they have no other options"

so again I go with the idea this is a long term process to raise the value of the Big 12 content overall like the shit the SEC SEC SEC does

also I contend that the Big 12 is capable of getting OOC games in a home and home format that would have as much or more value than random "Big 12" games

I will also point to this article here that I just saw because I knew there were stories about the ACC and 9 conference games

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/05/sports/ncaafootball/acc-conference-game-espn-college-football.html

ESPN has reportedly asked the A.C.C. either to move to a nine-game schedule or to require its teams to play two games against opponents in other power conferences if it stays at eight conference games

so that part of the article makes it clear that in the case of the ACC ESPN was willing to accept OOC P5 games instead of conference games.....there is no reason for the Big 12 to not do the same

as it is now pretty much every team in the Big 12 except 1 or 2 a year is actually playing 10 P5 games and from time to time 11.....so the Big 12 is already going above and beyond and for what extra money?

also I knew that some teams in the ACC wanted to play 9 conference games because they miss "jacking each other off more often" to the point where a couple of teams scheduled each other "in the OOC"

so I don't think there was any major money difference between ESPN wanting conference games and accepting two OOC P5 games because of there was then those "just glad to be here and want to play in a circle jerk" members of the ACC would have voted for more conference games and the meaningful extra cash in a heart beat

and there are a hell of a lot more "glad to be here playing you fellas and collecting a check" members of the ACC than there are FSUs and Clemsons that want to make the playoffs

Edited June 11, 2021 by ButtFumble

[maninblack 7974]

19 hours ago, atomheartbevo said:

He is but could've been 1/4 as long

[camel at sea 589]

1 hour ago, ButtFumble said:

I am not going to argue the value of the SEC SEC SEC vs The Big 12, but I will say "why is that" and in my opinion it is because they do all they can to make sure as many of their teams stay out of the 1-11 and 2-10 range and more of them to stay in the 5-7/7-5 range and make bowl games and that makes a difference

The SEC has been gaming the system and padding win totals for decades.  There are a ton of intra-conference games in that league that were never played very often even before Arky and South Carolina were added.  They were fortunate enough to operate this way before TV money was ever involved.  As a result, they have a lot of big brand schools, with big TV viewership and big fanbases.  The Big 12 can try to game the system, too, but it will take decades to catch up. 

Our second tier schools much more closely resemble the middle of the ACC than the middle of the SEC.  Texas and OU are not going to hang around making less money while Oklahoma State, Texas Tech, etc., start to look more like Auburn, Tennessee, etc.  Further, those schools are never going to catch up, win padding or not, if they're making significantly less money than their middle of the pack SEC counter-parts.  

The Big 12 either plays a 9 game conference slate to keep pace financially, or we take a big pay-cut to do win padding like you are suggesting.  We cannot make competitive money AND do win padding with our current lineup.  We need to add back 2-3 programs with huge fanbases to even have that discussion.  

[Hurtlocker 2208]

1 hour ago, camel at sea said:

The Big 12 either plays a 9 game conference slate to keep pace financially, or we take a big pay-cut to do win padding like you are suggesting.  We cannot make competitive money AND do win padding with our current lineup.  We need to add back 2-3 programs with huge fanbases to even have that discussion.  

This...there is no second option.   Its money OR its easy.   It is not both, not for decades.

[ButtFumble 5158]

1 hour ago, camel at sea said:

The SEC has been gaming the system and padding win totals for decades.  There are a ton of intra-conference games in that league that were never played very often even before Arky and South Carolina were added.  They were fortunate enough to operate this way before TV money was ever involved.  As a result, they have a lot of big brand schools, with big TV viewership and big fanbases.  The Big 12 can try to game the system, too, but it will take decades to catch up. 

Our second tier schools much more closely resemble the middle of the ACC than the middle of the SEC.  Texas and OU are not going to hang around making less money while Oklahoma State, Texas Tech, etc., start to look more like Auburn, Tennessee, etc.  Further, those schools are never going to catch up, win padding or not, if they're making significantly less money than their middle of the pack SEC counter-parts.  

The Big 12 either plays a 9 game conference slate to keep pace financially, or we take a big pay-cut to do win padding like you are suggesting.  We cannot make competitive money AND do win padding with our current lineup.  We need to add back 2-3 programs with huge fanbases to even have that discussion.  

well I am not sure there are going to be great places for OU and Texas to go

the PAC 12 and ACC are making less money as it is with more teams why in the hell would a media partner pay all those teams more money to get OU and Texas in there with them

The Big 10 probably is not interested in OU and the SEC SEC SEC might be, but I don't think OU will like how that works for them

there are no teams with "huge fan bases" available so living in that pretend world is even less likely than what I am proposing

not to mention I just showed above where ESPN is stated to have told the ACC they would accept P5 OOC games instead of in conference games

in addition if the CFP pays out even 2X the money it does now for expansion to the P5 tconferencess that makes it all the less likely the Big 10 or SEC SEC SEC will want even Texas or OU......because now you will be talking about $100 million per year to a conference for being a P5 conference and additional teams to the conference bring ZERO additional dollars to that and media partners are not going to make that up especially to 16 team conferences

in addition there is the issue with the LHN....I suppose Texas has some "leverage" with ESPN to give that up, but as of now ESPN owns very little of the Big 10 and the payouts to the ACC and PAC 12 vs the number of teams make it laughable that ESPN would take stopping paying Texas $15 million per year so they can have Texas in the PAC 12 or ACC and make sure that Texas still makes the same money.....and the ACC for sure is not going with uneven revenue and even if USC and UCLA want it for the PAC 12 well 10 others do not.....so not happening there either

people need to start realizing that Texas and even more so probably OU are in the Big 12 for a good while longer and if they are not then it is probably not going to be because they got huge new money to go elsewhere it will more likely be because took the best paying option available if ESPN and Fox decide to bust up the Big 12 and those options are not likely to be the Big 10 or SEC SEC SEC and they are even less likely to be a high paying PAC 12 or ACC

worse yet when you look at the budgets, debt, fan support, academic side subsidies, annual debts AFTER academic subsidies for a large number of the PAC 12 and ACC well if Texas wants any part of that shit they might as well give up now and go full aggy on "at least make money" because playing teams worth a shit and that are competitive over the long haul will be out....I mean shit WSU actually did a study and let it be reported in their major news papers about leaving the PAC 12 to the MWC.....who in the fuck moves to a conference with that shit going on

[kopp0e 1135]

3 hours ago, ButtFumble said:

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/05/sports/ncaafootball/acc-conference-game-espn-college-football.html

ESPN has reportedly asked the A.C.C. either to move to a nine-game schedule or to require its teams to play two games against opponents in other power conferences if it stays at eight conference games

so that part of the article makes it clear that in the case of the ACC ESPN was willing to accept OOC P5 games instead of conference games.....there is no reason for the Big 12 to not do the same

Well, there was what seemed to be out-of-left-field talk a few years back, speculation of a XII and PAC scheduling alliance:
---

Big 12, Pac-12 strategic alliance would make both stronger

https://www.mercurynews.com › 2019/02/26 › former-...

 

Feb 26, 2019 — A former Big 12 president has proposed that each team play three non-conference games against teams from the other league. That might be ...

--

Big 12/Pac-12 scheduling alliance in the future?

https://oklahoman.com › article › ex-kansas-state-presid...

 

Feb 26, 2019 — Former Kansas State president Jon Wefald has proposed a scheduling alliance between the Big 12 and Pac-12 conferences in which every Big ...

---
Maybe that is one way to reduce to 8 conference games, while adding in PAC foes/ BYU/ and a few top ACC games as well..?

[atomheartbevo 89449]

7 hours ago, conVINCEd said:

Taking a bunch of kids from Florida who have never seen snow in their lives to Michigan in January seems like a totally fair way to determine who is the better football team.

Not everybody else's fault that they are a bunch of pussies.

[ButtFumble 5158]

20 minutes ago, kopp0e said:

Well, there was what seemed to be out-of-left-field talk a few years back, speculation of a XII and PAC scheduling alliance:
---

Big 12, Pac-12 strategic alliance would make both stronger

https://www.mercurynews.com › 2019/02/26 › former-...

 

Feb 26, 2019 — A former Big 12 president has proposed that each team play three non-conference games against teams from the other league. That might be ...

--

Big 12/Pac-12 scheduling alliance in the future?

https://oklahoman.com › article › ex-kansas-state-presid...

 

Feb 26, 2019 — Former Kansas State president Jon Wefald has proposed a scheduling alliance between the Big 12 and Pac-12 conferences in which every Big ...

---
Maybe that is one way to reduce to 8 conference games, while adding in PAC foes/ BYU/ and a few top ACC games as well..?

 

I had said in the past that the Big 12 could work a deal with BYU for ZERO DOLLARS and ZERO conference input to simply play half the conference home and home every two years and I said that if it was up to me I would give WVU the option to opt out so they would not have to make the travel and because I think it is more important and better for them to play east coast teams and teams they have a prior history with

so for two years BYU would play 5 Big 12 teams and then 2 years play 4 with WVU deciding what they want that works for them

BYU is not exactly popular on this forum, but they are accepted as a "P5" by the other P5 conferences and it makes scheduling a bit easier

I also like BYU for the fact that they still play a lot of PAC 12 teams and they beat a number of them so if the top  Big 12 teams can take care of business against BYU then BYU can help if they go beat some PAC 12 teams

as to WVU specifically they play Maryland and VT both this year, they play Pitt and VT next year, they play Penn State and Pitt in 2023, same on 2024, and so far Pitt in 2025, Alabama in 2026 and 2027 and Tennessee so far at NASCAR track in 2028 so WVU is not scared to schedule the tough games, bu they get little reward for that as it is now

but done properly with WVU hopefully taking care of business in east coast games like that, the Big 12 having more OOC freedom, and perhaps BYU in there (on the schedule no conference affiliation at all) and still beating some PAC 12 schools well that sets up nicely for the Big 12 to make things happen for themselves instead of sitting around hoping that tOSU shits the bed in a regular season conference game (but herbie handjob said it was early in the season and look how they are playing NOW!) and also perhaps loses the CCG also and that Clemson finally has a shitty loss or two losses and one of them shitty

the Big 12 needs to fucking kill what it wants to eat not sit around hoping for fucking scraps while having a 9 team circle jerk that has been proven no one gives a fuck about

Edited June 12, 2021 by ButtFumble

[atomheartbevo 89449]

1 hour ago, ButtFumble said:

well I am not sure there are going to be great places for OU and Texas to go

the PAC 12 and ACC are making less money as it is with more teams why in the hell would a media partner pay all those teams more money to get OU and Texas in there with them

The Big 10 probably is not interested in OU and the SEC SEC SEC might be, but I don't think OU will like how that works for them

.......

people need to start realizing that Texas and even more so probably OU are in the Big 12 for a good while longer

OU and Texas aren't going anywhere else for a lot of reasons.  Start with both teams enjoying being big dogs in their conference.  Their respective BMDs would not accept them kowtowing to Alabama or any left-coast teams or Ohio State or whoever.

From what I recall, the SEC requires  a unanimous vote on adding members, and putting aside the fact that aggy would not support UT or OU joining the SEC, both for pride and for recruiting reasons, quite a few other SEC members wouldn't support it either, because a 12-team playoff means some of those other SEC teams have an easy path to the CFP, and UT and OU would both be obstacles to that.  Hell, Alabama might not even be keen on adding either one.  Same situation with Big 10 - OU would make it harder for some Big 10 teams to get in the CFP.

But the biggest reason is that now UT and OU have a very easy path to the CFP.  OU in particular, given their productivity, will be in it every year pretty much.  That's a huge recruiting advantage as well.  UT and OU would not go to another P5 conference, where it would be harder for them to get into the CFP.

At the end of the day, the Big 12's problems all revolve around teams who aren't OU having problems on the field, and not winning games they should.

Ain't nobody going anywhere.

Edited June 12, 2021 by atomheartbevo

[ButtFumble 5158]

1 minute ago, atomheartbevo said:

OU and Texas aren't going anywhere else for a lot of reasons.  Start with both teams enjoying being big dogs in their conference.  Their respective BMDs would not accept them kowtowing to Alabama or any left-coast teams or Ohio State or whoever.

From what I recall, the SEC requires  a unanimous vote on adding members, and putting aside the fact that aggy would not support UT or OU joining the SEC, both for pride and for recruiting reasons, quite a few other SEC members wouldn't support it either, because a 12-team playoff means some of those other SEC teams have an easy path to the CFP, and UT and OU would both be obstacles to that.  Hell, Alabama might not even be keen on adding either one.  Same situation with Big 10 - OU would make it harder for some Big 10 teams to get in the CFP.

But the biggest reason is that now UT and OU have a very easy path to the CFP.  OU in particular, given their productivity, will be in it every year pretty much.  That's a huge recruiting advantage as well.  UT and OU would not go to another P5 conference, where it would be harder for them to get into the CFP.

At the end of the day, the Big 12's problems all revolve around teams who aren't OU having problems on the field, and not winning games they should.

Ain't nobody going anywhere.

I gagree with these points 100%....I just also feel that Texas and OU have what it takes to make a schedule for themselves that is "playoff ready" be it with 9 conference games, 8 conference games, 7 conference games or fucking 4 conference games

but it is better for them and easier for them if the rest of the conference can play the way the SEC SEC SEC does and get some traction how ever they can and I believe that can be done with a mandate or financial incentives for 2 P5 OOC games with a 7 game conference schedule and I believe the Big 12 can get paid well enough to have that happen if they sell it properly and take care of business enough on the field

[Wulaw Horn 18981]

On 4/26/2021 at 3:03 PM, Mole said:

To repeat my pie-in-the-sky plan, college football postseason is done backwards. We argue about the number of teams to include, pick a number, then force the teams into that number. Instead, there should be objective criteria for championship worthiness (some transparent formula of achievements like conference championships and ELO-like calculations). Every team that meets some established benchmark makes the playoffs. Anyone who doesn’t, stays at home or goes to whatever bowls are left over.

If two teams make it, there’s your championship game. If 8 make it, you have a big tournament.

A five-loss conference champion shouldn’t make the playoffs and an undefeated conference champion shouldn’t be left out. Establish criteria that will give you 4-8 worthy teams most years and then play it out.

It would never work because of TV, but it’s the best way. Everyone would know the standards from day one and we’d always have playoffs of only championship caliber teams.

This might truly be the worst idea I’ve ever seen bandied about on this subject (or at least the one I hate by far the most). 
no offense intended. 

[atomheartbevo 89449]

15 minutes ago, ButtFumble said:

I gagree with these points 100%....I just also feel that Texas and OU have what it takes to make a schedule for themselves that is "playoff ready" be it with 9 conference games, 8 conference games, 7 conference games or fucking 4 conference games

but it is better for them and easier for them if the rest of the conference can play the way the SEC SEC SEC does and get some traction how ever they can and I believe that can be done with a mandate or financial incentives for 2 P5 OOC games with a 7 game conference schedule and I believe the Big 12 can get paid well enough to have that happen if they sell it properly and take care of business enough on the field

If UT and OU (and this applies to OSU and Baylor) perform such that one is undefeated and the other has a single loss, or both end up with a single loss at the end of the season, they are both in.   They know it, and you and others have alluded to that.  That's why I think nothing will change with the B12.  All the arguments about the B12 missing out on the CFP because of B12 SOS issues go out the window.

But to your other point - all the other schools also know that if they finish with only a single loss (or maybe two depending on the year), they could all get into the CFP. No way in hell Baylor or Tech or OSU, as well as the others, want a harder schedule.  

And by the way, this applies to the SEC, the PAC, the Big 10, ACC.  If anything, I think you'll see a move toward the other end of the spectrum - top teams wanting as easy of a slate as possible, knowing that even if they drop the CCG, as long as they do it with only one loss, they still have a shot at the CFP.

Edited June 12, 2021 by atomheartbevo

[Mole 4320]

1 hour ago, Wulaw Horn said:

This might truly be the worst idea I’ve ever seen bandied about on this subject (or at least the one I hate by far the most). 
no offense intended. 

I’m sure the 1st person to suggest cooking their food rather than gnawing on the rotting carcass was roundly mocked, but now we have the Steel Shank thread. Advancement will ruffle some feathers but the payoff is huge. I’m well aware that my approach will likely never be popular.

Starting with the standard rather than the number of teams is the only objective and truly fair way to do it. Every other method is just giving a trophy to the team that won the last game on the calendar. That’s no real test of a champion.

[Treefidy 1463]

1 hour ago, atomheartbevo said:

If UT and OU (and this applies to OSU and Baylor) perform such that one is undefeated and the other has a single loss, or both end up with a single loss at the end of the season, they are both in.   They know it, and you and others have alluded to that.  That's why I think nothing will change with the B12.  All the arguments about the B12 missing out on the CFP because of B12 SOS issues go out the window.

But to your other point - all the other schools also know that if they finish with only a single loss (or maybe two depending on the year), they could all get into the CFP. No way in hell Baylor or Tech or OSU, as well as the others, want a harder schedule.  

And by the way, this applies to the SEC, the PAC, the Big 10, ACC.  If anything, I think you'll see a move toward the other end of the spectrum - top teams wanting as easy of a slate as possible, knowing that even if they drop the CCG, as long as they do it with only one loss, they still have a shot at the CFP.

In our current format there is no way for us to have an undefeated and a 1 loss team at the end.  We can have 2 one loss teams, and a two loss team.  Or an undefeated and 2 two loss teams..   

Round robin sucks when your the only one doing it, it’s why the P12 added teams back when USC and Oregon were good but they were the only conference handicapping theirselves.  

[hpslugga 4044]

16 minutes ago, Mole said:

I’m sure the 1st person to suggest cooking their food rather than gnawing on the rotting carcass was roundly mocked, but now we have the Steel Shank thread. Advancement will ruffle some feathers but the payoff is huge. I’m well aware that my approach will likely never be popular.

Starting with the standard rather than the number of teams is the only objective and truly fair way to do it. Every other method is just giving a trophy to the team that won the last game on the calendar. That’s no real test of a champion.

[atomheartbevo 89449]

48 minutes ago, Treefidy said:

In our current format there is no way for us to have an undefeated and a 1 loss team at the end.  We can have 2 one loss teams, and a two loss team.  Or an undefeated and 2 two loss teams..   

Round robin sucks when your the only one doing it, it’s why the P12 added teams back when USC and Oregon were good but they were the only conference handicapping theirselves.  

 Sorry, thought he was also talking about ditching CCG for B12.   With it, yeah, sucks, but those combos you mention, one team is still guaranteed and there’s a chance of getting other teams in.  It’ll be dicey with a two loss 2nd place team, but it depends on the losses.  16 would suit us better, but that’s just more SEC teams in it as well   

Still, I don’t think any conferences will be looking to make things harder on themselves now.  SOS simply does not matter for the conference champ now.   Conference expansion is dead.  

[Askew 362]

1 hour ago, Treefidy said:

In our current format there is no way for us to have an undefeated and a 1 loss team at the end.  We can have 2 one loss teams, and a two loss team.  Or an undefeated and 2 two loss teams..   

Round robin sucks when your the only one doing it, it’s why the P12 added teams back when USC and Oregon were good but they were the only conference handicapping theirselves.  

 

56 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

 Sorry, thought he was also talking about ditching CCG for B12.   With it, yeah, sucks, but those combos you mention, one team is still guaranteed and there’s a chance of getting other teams in.  It’ll be dicey with a two loss 2nd place team, but it depends on the losses.  16 would suit us better, but that’s just more SEC teams in it as well   

Still, I don’t think any conferences will be looking to make things harder on themselves now.  SOS simply does not matter for the conference champ now.   Conference expansion is dead.  

This is the point I was making, and the reason for Big 12 expansion. Our league is capped out at 3 teams that can have 10 wins each year. While we argue whether we can get 2 and maybeee 3 teams in, the Big 10 and SEC are wondering whether they can get 3, 4 or even 5 in. Neither conference is ever going to say "it's going to be dicey for the 2nd place team to get in."  One reason is they win their OOC gams, but the main reason is they have more available wins in conference. 

If we want to talk about increasing the money and eyeballs that flow to the Big 12, it needs to start with the positive impact of multiple teams making the CFP, and what that does to the schedule the next year. We want to play as many "big time games" as possible each year, and that conversation will soon be dominated by which teams are always in the top-12. 

[Treefidy 1463]

The way things seem to be heading, I would just assume blow the whole thing up and join the NFC south with UT, OU, OSU, Tech, LSU, piggy, aggy, and pick one more.  

those are the games I would want on the yearly slate, that’s where most of the people I know went to school.  Baylor’s probably that 8th team though fuck them, they should be keel hulled (is that still a thing you can get away with?) 

 

 

[Zeus 5950]

On 6/11/2021 at 2:50 PM, camel at sea said:

Yep.  The SEC's conference games are worth more than the in-league games of the Big 12.  This gives them the ability to only play 8 instead of 9 without falling behind.  As a result, then they can game the system w/ OOC schedule and build themselves up even farther.  

The Big 12 can do what the ACC is doing and try to play fewer conference games to build up our brands with inflated records... but our inventory is not worth as much, so we're going to be in a financial hole (like the ACC) if we try it.  

Sounds like reason #0851025832590329 to go independent and let Baylor and TCU rot with Houston.

[ButtFumble 5158]

55 minutes ago, Zeus said:

Sounds like reason #0851025832590329 to go independent and let Baylor and TCU rot with Houston.

there are of course issues with this

I don't think ND makes close to what Texas makes in total with their NBC deal....Texas could afford to deal with less money from any media deal, but why

does Texas really want to park their Olympic Sports in the WAC or some shit like that.....and as with Boise a lot of those conferences are not going to want Texas because Texas brings a massive budget (even without conference money or with a lesser independent deal) and will be taking auto bids from those conference schools with pretty much nothing of benefit to those conference schools

[Brothahorn 10085]

I guess the lesson here is be careful what we wish for. Because the idiots who run college football will fuck it up.

12 teams is dumb.

[HtownHorn 14488]

On 6/10/2021 at 9:39 PM, Valmy77 said:

Kind of pathetic and embarrassing that at no point since 2013 would we even be in a 12 team playoff. Bravo Chuck and Tom you miserable millionaire failures.

Depends. If both TCU and Baylor make the 1st 12 team playoff it's doubtful the Big 12 adds the championship game, and it's very likely a 10-3 Texas team in 2018 is one of the 12 teams invited. We were #9 going into the Big 12 championship game with a win over OU.

Hell if the 12 team playoff is adopted, the Big 12 should either drop a conference game for a OOC, or do away with the conference championship game.