How to add meaning to the Big 12 Title Game

[junior4949]

Here's the record of the Big 12 Championship game. Notice how the South has owned the North:

 

BIG 12 CONFERENCE CHAMPIONS

Year Team Record

1996 Texas 6-2

1997 Nebraska 8-0

1998 Texas A&M 7-1

1999 Nebraska 7-1

2000 Oklahoma 8-0

2001 Colorado 7-1

2002 Oklahoma 6-2

2003 Kansas St. 6-2

2004 Oklahoma 8-0

2005 Texas 8-0

2006 Oklahoma 7-1

2007 Oklahoma 6-2

2008 Oklahoma 7-1

[butterswolfman]

Here's the record of the Big 12 Championship game. Notice how the South has owned the North:

 

BIG 12 CONFERENCE CHAMPIONS

Year Team Record

1996 Texas 6-2

1997 Nebraska 8-0

1998 Texas A&M 7-1

1999 Nebraska 7-1

2000 Oklahoma 8-0

2001 Colorado 7-1

2002 Oklahoma 6-2

2003 Kansas St. 6-2

2004 Oklahoma 8-0

2005 Texas 8-0

2006 Oklahoma 7-1

2007 Oklahoma 6-2

2008 Oklahoma 7-1

expand pac 10 big ten big east to twelve team leagues and adopt a championship game for each confrence BCS issue solved

[zoogs]

When? The South has owned the North ever since the conference was formed. Go look at the Big 12 Champions. The South won 2 of the first 3. The North has never won back to back Big 12 Championships. The South is 9-4.

 

Big 12's been in existence for not even 20 years. There was a time when OU and UT were way down. That time will come again. What then?

 

These suggestions just don't make any sense. Sure in a given year it might be this way, and sure, in many recent years it might be. But that's no guarantee it will always be that way.

[irafreak]

Actually it was back an forth in the title game until the last 5 years.

 

It's a terrible idea. First of all...what if Texass and OU are two powerful teams other than their matchup they both win out. Why should the winner of the red river rivalry be forced to play another undefeated team in the big 12 title game like TCU....alabama and florida don't play each other this season so the whole thing could be reversed next season. (what if Nebraska and OU both end up undefeated in conference play next season and meet in the big 12 but alabama is undefeated and no one from the other division is decent...do we then force bama to play a game against cincinnati? Double standard. They would say the SEC is better)

 

Then you have the money to think about. You think the big12 wants to split the revenue with another conference for that game? Doubt it. Bottom line is the big 12 gets no respect. If all the teams in the SEC west had 3 conference losses all the talk would be about how tough that conference is.

[junior4949]

My responses are with regards to the poster who claimed the North owned the Big 12 the first half of the years it's been formed when in reality that couldn't be further from the truth. I still think the Big 12 should keep the teams we already have and do away with the championship game making all teams play one another.

[bhunt7]

When? The South has owned the North ever since the conference was formed. Go look at the Big 12 Champions. The South won 2 of the first 3. The North has never won back to back Big 12 Championships. The South is 9-4.

 

You must have just started watching football. Any person who really knows anything about college football knows that after the formation of the conference, NU was the favorite to win the Big XII title every year of that decade. Get a clue! A lot of people today seem to have very short term memories!

[broganreynik]

 

While the Big 12 North champion, a division that is 1-4 overall in the BCS and hasn’t won a BCS Bowl since 1999, just has to go 5-3 or 6-2 in a mediocre conference to get the opportunity to go to the BCS.

 

 

Not that I'm proud of it, but Kansas won the Orange Bowl in '07 did they not?

[junior4949]

When? The South has owned the North ever since the conference was formed. Go look at the Big 12 Champions. The South won 2 of the first 3. The North has never won back to back Big 12 Championships. The South is 9-4.

 

You must have just started watching football. Any person who really knows anything about college football knows that after the formation of the conference, NU was the favorite to win the Big XII title every year of that decade. Get a clue! A lot of people today seem to have very short term memories!

 

 

There's been 13 Big 12 Championship games. Nebraska has won 2 or roughly 15% of them. In 2003, OU was the favorite. However, they didn't win the game. It matters little who the favorite is to win the game. What matters is who actually won the game. The South won 2 of the first 3 championship games played. In 1998, I don't think Nebraska was even remotely considered the favorite to win the Big 12. Since the Championship game has been played, the South has scored 427 points in 13 games or roughly 33 points a game while the North has scored 292 points or just over 22 points a game. The last remotely close competitive game was in 2001.

[zoogs]

The South won 2 the first 4 championships played, too. As point of fact, they won 3 of the first 6 and 4 of the first 8.

 

Yeah, it's been dominant over the North for maybe a decade. So what, though?

[funhusker]

 

While the Big 12 North champion, a division that is 1-4 overall in the BCS and hasn’t won a BCS Bowl since 1999, just has to go 5-3 or 6-2 in a mediocre conference to get the opportunity to go to the BCS.

 

 

Not that I'm proud of it, but Kansas won the Orange Bowl in '07 did they not?

exactly what I was thinking.

[808Husker in KCMO]

I hope no one thinks I wrote this.

[zoogs]

I hope no one thinks I wrote this.

 

I did at first. Don't worry though From the way other people were reacting (i.e "this douche", "that tool") I eventually figured it out and saw there was a [source] link.

[huzkerbob]

The South won 2 the first 4 championships played, too. As point of fact, they won 3 of the first 6 and 4 of the first 8.

 

Yeah, it's been dominant over the North for maybe a decade. So what, though?

 

Uh 2 0ut of 4, 3 of 6, 4 of 8. that doesn't sound like domination, hell that's a .500 record. The south has only been "dominate" the last 5 years. But even that fact is misleading because Texas and OU are the only two teams to ever play in the title game other than aTm in 97.

 

So considering OU is down, and the only quality team this season is the south this year is TX. Then what is the author trying to imply that not only does NU not have any business of being on the field in CCG this year, but that the Big 12 as a whole is the most lopsided and top heavy of all the conferences year in and year out? Give me a break!

 

This guy should pay a little more attention to the rest of the country, because I could name several other conferences that could use more legitimacy pumped into their championships than the Big 12.

 

And what about the huge amount of money the conference would be giving away? This is a ridiculous idea, that makes no sense at all.

[junior4949]

I firmly believe all Big 12 schools should play one another and do away with the Big 12 Championship game. If this were to happen, we wouldn't have the KU fluff factor year in and year out.

[zoogs]

Well, I was arguing the point that they haven't been as dominant as otherwise suggested until recently. I think the stretch is closer to a decade than half a decade though.

 

I will say that the North had to pull off an upset or two in their last two CCG victories to even up the first 8 years.