California Husker
Starter
I think the point is not whether or not conferences have HAD co-champions in the past. I believe the point is that (at least according to Baylor) it is in the bylaws of the conference that since they no longer have a CCG, the conference is supposed to select a champion and in the case of a tie, the first tie-breaker is head-to-head play.Landlord of Memorial Stadium said:I don't know how the Big XII rewrote their rules specifically, but this isn't a big deal.
Co-champions is how conferences without championship games have done it since....pretty much forever. We were Co-Big 8 champions a ton of times, The B1G had co-champions in 2004, 2005, 2008, and 2010.
Divisions work the same way. In 2008 we were the North division co-champions with Mizzou, but they won tiebreaker to represent in the ccg. In 2010, it was the other way around, with them being co-champions as well.
I agree that this shouldn't be a big deal...except that the Big XII's thing this year was that each team played every other team, so they had "One True Champion". It's just ironic that using that theme to sell their conference (as though it is somehow a better system than a CCG), they now REFUSE to name One True Champion.