How to add meaning to the Big 12 Title Game

I'm posting this with my tounge planted firmly in my cheek.

Want to make the Conference Championship more meaningful? Well here goes. Get rid of the four Texas trailer park trash schools and play the game on Thanksgiving day or in a pinch the Friday after. Flip flop the the stadium where it is played every other year either in Lincoln or Norman and have Nebraska and Oklahoma be the teams competing for the title. There you are... PERFECT!

T_O_B

:bonez :cheers :cheers :wasted :wasted :wasted :cheers :cheers :bonez

 
junior4949 said:
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
Click to expand...
Notice how Oklahoma owns the North.

 
How about Utah and Boise St join the PAC 10, call it the PAC 12 and do the exact same thing? That would make more sense.

PAC 12 North

Utah

Boise

Washington

Oregon

Oregon st

Washington St

PAC 12 South

Cal

Stanford

USC

UCLA

Arizona

Arizona St

--That would make that conference legit.

 
newenglandhusker said:
Dumb idea. Just because the North has been down recently versus the South. This is cyclical and the North will be elevating its level (hopefully mostly due to Nebraska) so it won't be thought of as it is now.

:leghump:
Click to expand...

Boy, I don't know... I've been reading over on the netbuffs board how Colorado just won its 3rd game of the year and are going to win the North... We probably shouldn't even be talking about this since we're not involved anymore...... :sarcasm

 
General Blackshirt said:
Overall, it's not that dumb of an idea. It can't work within the established context of the conferences, but I like the idea.

This is what I propose to adjust his idea:

1. Kick out Baylor

2. Add TCU, Utah, BYU, and Air Force

3. Create 3 new divisions of 5 teams each:

South

Texas

Oklahoma

Oklahoma State

Texas A&M

Texas Tech

North

Nebraska

Mizzou

Kansas

Kansas State

Iowa State

Mountain West

TCU

Air Force

Utah

BYU

Colorado

4. Each team plays all 4 other teams in their division, and then 2 from each other division (with one home and one away game against each division).

5. 3 Divisional champions are crowned

6. The lowest ranked of the 3 divisonal champions is not considered. The remaining two play for the conference champion.

I like it better than what we have now. Possible? No. But I'm bored and I don't care :cowbell:
Click to expand...
I know that this is all pipe dreaming, and some are hitting that pipe a little harder than others, but I just want to stand up for Baylor for a second-- this is something that we as husker fans do have to stop and consider from time to time-- football is not the only sport.

Yeah, it's the only one that I care about, but people at Baylor might care as much about football as I do about basketball. Isn't baseball their football? :)

 
Baylor is in because the governor at the time was a Baylor grad, and wouldn't let the public Texas schools join without Baylor.

 
broganreynik said:
808Husker in KCMO said:
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.
Click to expand...
Not that I'm proud of it, but Kansas won the Orange Bowl in '07 did they not?
Click to expand...
OHHHHHHHHHHH.... Because the Mountain West Conference is full of powerhouses ya know?..... :sarcasm

This dude needs to quit tootin' his own horn and realize that besides Utah BYU and TCU, and other than TCU, the other teams have been RECENT successes.... these three schools are the only even RESPECTABLE programs in the MWC. Maybe he should realize that a LARGE part of the reason that these schools are undefeated or have one or two losses is because they play in a weak conference. It doesn't matter what their record says... if they played in a BCS conference, especially such as the big 12, they would have 3 or more losses. BIG XII > MWC

And yes... the BIG XII would never go for it. Why do these ridiculous journalists actually get paid to do this? I'm changing my major so I can get paid to bullsh#t my way to a paycheck every week.

 
While I agree they play softer conference schedules. The one thing I will say is the are winning the games they should win. People often say they wouldn't hold up playing in major conferences. I think that everyone is under the assumption that they will continue to recruit 1 - 3 star players.

Once you make it into a big boy conference you will attract better talent to your team because you will be playing stronger opponents. I don't think you can penalize a team for doing as they asked. It is short sightedness of the part of the BCS that is allowing this to happen. They made it a point say Notre Dame will have an automatic berth if it is finishes inside the top eight of the final BCS standings and other provision for selecting at large teams. They however made no provision for what happens if one of the non BSC school just happens to win all their games.

 
eagskerfan said:
junior4949 said:
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
Click to expand...
Notice how Oklahoma owns the North.
Click to expand...

What I notice is how OU has basically owned the Big 12. They've won nearly 50% of the time since the Big 12 was formed. For the guy below who claims Texas owns the conference, I'm still scratching my head in wonderment how exactly? Mack has managed just one conference championship.

 
junior4949 said:
First half of the Big 12? Isn't the South like 9-4? I know Texas won the very first Big 12 Championship. In fact, the South won 2 of the first 3 Big 12 Championships. It's impossible to argue that the North has owned the South at any time since the Big 12 was formed. In fact, the North has NEVER won back to back Big 12 Championships!
Click to expand...

Funny, I didn't see the word "owned" anywhere in my post. I just said the North was better. I just thought that we had the better teams. Hell even making the argument that it was COMPETITIVE at one point in time shoots down this tools master plan for making his pee-wee league matter. It will be COMPETITIVE once again and the title game will matter. As I said before, anyone thinking that Texas has a lock on the title will be surprised when NU or KSU will come prepared to win. EXPECTING to win. Callahan and Prince are gone. The loser mentality is gone. Neither of these teams will walk on to that field expecting anything less than a win. Should UT win? Sure. They should win every game they play. Its always been that way.

 
How about this for a possible solution to current and future division imbalance: floating divisions.

1. Add BYU, Utah, TCU, and Air Force to the conference. (if necessary, only for football and not other sports)

2. Create 4 roughly equal half-divisions:

north-NU, ISU, MU, CU

central-KU, OU, KS, OSU

south-UT, TT, aTm, BU

west-TCU, BYU, Utah, AF

3. Divisions are made of 2 half-divisions and swap every 2 years between

north (north and west) v. south (central and south)

southwest (south and west) v. classic (central and north)

4. 7 games are played within division and 1 game is played cross-division against a teams conference rival if the team has one or random team if not

OU v NU and KU v MU in north v south years

OU v UT in southwest v classic years

5. Teams with the highest in-division records go to championship. Winner in head to head for tie breaker. Only in the case of 3 way ties are cross-division games counted.

 
schlumper said:
How about this for a possible solution to current and future division imbalance: floating divisions.

1. Add BYU, Utah, TCU, and Air Force to the conference. (if necessary, only for football and not other sports)

2. Create 4 roughly equal half-divisions:

north-NU, ISU, MU, CU

central-KU, OU, KS, OSU

south-UT, TT, aTm, BU

west-TCU, BYU, Utah, AF

3. Divisions are made of 2 half-divisions and swap every 2 years between

north (north and west) v. south (central and south)

southwest (south and west) v. classic (central and north)

4. 7 games are played within division and 1 game is played cross-division against a teams conference rival if the team has one or random team if not

OU v NU and KU v MU in north v south years

OU v UT in southwest v classic years

5. Teams with the highest in-division records go to championship. Winner in head to head for tie breaker. Only in the case of 3 way ties are cross-division games counted.
Click to expand...

man you put a lot of thought into this!

i like it but dump TCU and Colorado.

one Colorado team is enough, and Texas already has too many.

i would recommend adding a new mexico, Wyoming, or one of the Dakota Schools. just on better representation standards.

only thing i would add is maybe adding a small play off between the division winners so that a good team doesn't get left out.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top