Looks like no Big12 expansion
- Thread starter VaultHunter
- Start date
Personally I would like to see a Championship game but I have no idea how the Big12 would determine who would play and how it would make 2 divisions. I was hoping to see the Big12 add two schools closer to West Virginia but this probably is the best case scenario for WVU and the Big12.
Still play round robin so we get Oklahoma or Texas each year at home.
2 divisions. OU and Texas will be in opposite divisions. Someone will figure how to divide the rest.
Or just take the top 2 teams in the standings. There's really no reason to have divisions. Just take the top 2.
2 divisions. OU and Texas will be in opposite divisions. Someone will figure how to divide the rest.
Or just take the top 2 teams in the standings. There's really no reason to have divisions. Just take the top 2.
Last edited:
this is the worse case scenario for wvu. will have to win them all to get into the hunt. one loss and things get dicey. better find a hc who can get it done or here comes years of baseball stadium bowl games. damn.
This isn't bad for WVU. Imagine a scenario like this past year with WVU at 11-1 (like Oklahoma). Do you think we would get in the CFP? The answer is absolutely not. As long as we are in the top two in the conference, we get to play for the Big XII title. If we win, and depending on everyone else's records and resume, we get in the CFP. It's a lot harder to turn away a one loss team from the CFP if they are a conference champion.
There is no need for divisions in the conference since the agreement was based on the Big XII playing a round robin schedule with 10 teams. If two teams are added to the conference, then yes, there is a need for divisions.
There is no need for divisions in the conference since the agreement was based on the Big XII playing a round robin schedule with 10 teams. If two teams are added to the conference, then yes, there is a need for divisions.
Somehow I think if wvu went 12-0 and finished first and Baylor went 10-2 and finished second and then....upset wvu in a rematch at a neutral field down in texas, then a lot of folks who think no expansion is good would blow a gasket. lol However it is all a moot point now that 6-6, or 7-5 in the regular season has become the norm for a 'successful' season now days.
One (of many) reason a Big 12 championship game hurts WVU... ...it will most likely be played at a neutral venue IN THE STATE OF TEXAS.
Sure they could, and should, allow the first place team to host the game as a reward for ALREADY EARNING ON THE FIELD FIRST PLACE..... ...but we know that's unlikely. So WVU fans could choose to plan a last minute (expensive) trip halfway across the country for what's essentially a road game or save their money for a playoff or bowl game.
I could ramble on... ...but the championship game for WVU fans will be a road game... ...and not many other Big 12 teams can say the same thing.
Sure they could, and should, allow the first place team to host the game as a reward for ALREADY EARNING ON THE FIELD FIRST PLACE..... ...but we know that's unlikely. So WVU fans could choose to plan a last minute (expensive) trip halfway across the country for what's essentially a road game or save their money for a playoff or bowl game.
I could ramble on... ...but the championship game for WVU fans will be a road game... ...and not many other Big 12 teams can say the same thing.
Without expansion, the Big 12 is one school defection from implosion. but hey I hear everyone who keeps saying "no one else is worthy of membership."
I'm with ya... ...people need to understand expansion would be an investment and shouldn't expect increased revenue instantly. Everybody says we should consider it when our GOR is up... ...but that's exactly when we may lose a team or two.
Invest now... ...not when you need the results from the investment tomorrow.
It will be very interesting to see how the $$ PER TEAM works out this year with the Big 12 represented in the 4-team playoff. It could be a wake-up call to the other (diluted) Power 5 conferences if we end up ahead of them. I really think we might.
If that happens (and happens consistently for a few years) we would be able to attract 2 teams from existing power 5 schools that bring a lot to the table. How about if we pick up Nebraska and Penn State while the Big ten decides whether they want to take Memphis and Cincinnati to replace them. Crazy? Maybe, but money talks.
Lgm!
If that happens (and happens consistently for a few years) we would be able to attract 2 teams from existing power 5 schools that bring a lot to the table. How about if we pick up Nebraska and Penn State while the Big ten decides whether they want to take Memphis and Cincinnati to replace them. Crazy? Maybe, but money talks.
Lgm!
Wouldn't Kansas City be the best location? That's where the basketball tournament is. After thinking about it no need for divisions just take two best conference records and call it a day. If there is any kind of tie just use committee rankings to determine teams.
A defection by Texas or Oklahoma threatens the league. They are the only teams with standing offers and interest. If they leave there is nobody to add that would save the league from being perceived as no better than any G5 conference. Any team OTHER than Texas or Oklahoma leaving is as inconsequential as it is unlikely. The key will always be what these 2 schools want as long as what they want is not absurd. WVU has lost nothing. You can't lose what you never had.
How could you even have divisions with a round robin 10 team league ?
You can't...
Personally IF the Big12 had a chance at getting 2 teams from a P5 conference my two would be Arkansas and Pitt. Notre Dame would be the best scenario and if the Big12 could get Notre Dame I don't think I would care who the second team would be. Bottom line this pretty much kills Big12 expansion for a very long time. So much for the Big12 helping WVU with taking eastern schools.
No, I didn't hence it.
Two teams playing a rematch after playing the exact same schedule (except for locations) just doesn't make sense either.
Huge win for the Big 12 and Bob Bowlsby! The trolls and low information fans will never be able to understand why.
And I really don't understand why the AAC (not ACC) was against this. Any expansion by the Big XII could threaten a raid of their conference.
There is very little money from making the playoff. 6 million dollars for playing in the playoff. Not a windfall. 2 million more that we got for TCU playing in the Peach last year.
Wouldn't be so sure-Oklahoma's president on the CCG deregulation:
In a statement to the Oklahoma Daily student newspaper, Boren indicated that the Big 12 would remain "disadvantaged" relative to the other Power 5 conferences, even if it added a conference championship game without also expanding.
"The Big 12 is disadvantaged when compared to the other conferences in three ways. We do not have at least twelve members, we do not have a conference network, and we do not have a championship game," Boren said in the statement. "I think that all three of these disadvantages need to be addressed at the same time. Addressing only one without addressing all three will not be adequate to improve the strength of the conference."
http://espn.go.com/blog/big12/post/...advantaged-even-after-title-game-deregulation
In a statement to the Oklahoma Daily student newspaper, Boren indicated that the Big 12 would remain "disadvantaged" relative to the other Power 5 conferences, even if it added a conference championship game without also expanding.
"The Big 12 is disadvantaged when compared to the other conferences in three ways. We do not have at least twelve members, we do not have a conference network, and we do not have a championship game," Boren said in the statement. "I think that all three of these disadvantages need to be addressed at the same time. Addressing only one without addressing all three will not be adequate to improve the strength of the conference."
http://espn.go.com/blog/big12/post/...advantaged-even-after-title-game-deregulation
Agree 100%. That's why you take one team (UCF) and only one. You build that team up. You keep the RR format. By the time the GOR comes up they are the 3rd best program in Florida (at worst) and a major player. Then it's not the end of the world if UT or OU threatens to leave. Then the rest of the league has some leverage.
At this point, UT and OU could literally dictate anything in 10 years and the rest of this conference would have to acquiesce.
Does this mean there won't be any more topics on expansion in the Big XII?
Yeah!!!!
Round robin play continues and my season tickets remain the greatest value ever. Glad nobody got a case of the gone stupid disease.
Yeah!!!!
Round robin play continues and my season tickets remain the greatest value ever. Glad nobody got a case of the gone stupid disease.
OU and Texas may have standing offers to join another conference but the potential for leaving may not be as high as some think. The respective ADs both know that they are still kingpins in the Big 12 and have a better chance at a national title opportunity here than in the other P5 conferences on an annual basis. If they were to leave, they would not wield similar power and influence in those conferences. Boran has some good points and I do believe that the conference should try to move in that direction. Having the choice of a CCG is a first step but I think expansion is going to happen within the next few years. Personally, I will miss the round robin schedules that have brought both Texas and OU to Morgantown every other year.
With or without expansion, the round robin is probably going away. The commissioner spoke about going to an eight game conference schedule to avoid a rematch in a CCG just the other day. Playing a CCG with 10 teams that already played each other just doesn't make any sense.
No it isn't. That was THE condition that allowed us to play a conference championship game with less than 12 members.
That was the condition that allowed deregulation. The BIG 12 hasn't decided what its going to do-but you are right they couldn't do that under deregulation rules.
Ignoring Oklahoma (and others) needs is going to send the BIG 12 down the path of the now defunct Big East.
Burying heads in the sand isn't going to make the Pac 12, SEC or especially Big Ten not covet schools like Oklahoma. You may not like expansion, but they do.
Burying heads in the sand isn't going to make the Pac 12, SEC or especially Big Ten not covet schools like Oklahoma. You may not like expansion, but they do.
If Oklahoma wants to expand, we had better to it, and pronto, or Oklahoma will be in the PAC 10 or the SEC within 5 years and WVU is in big trouble and the Big XII will probably cease to exist. Texas would go independent or go to any conference they want, and they could care less what happens to the other schools in the conference.
Im for expansion but i don't think there is any teams out there right now worth going after.
The round robin CCG rematch game is acceptable short term. At least with a round robin schedule, everybody plays against everybody and this Mountaineer fan(me) enjoys the UT oSu and OU games. I do not want those games to go away. But i also realize its not a sustainable situation(not the NJ kid from Jersey shore) long term.
The round robin CCG rematch game is acceptable short term. At least with a round robin schedule, everybody plays against everybody and this Mountaineer fan(me) enjoys the UT oSu and OU games. I do not want those games to go away. But i also realize its not a sustainable situation(not the NJ kid from Jersey shore) long term.
Oklahoma's president believes there are teams out there right now worth going after. Pretty sure he has a better grasp on all of this than any of us.
Its not acceptable to put the conference in jeopardy for a short term possibility of making the playoffs--but that seems to be the road some in the conference have chosen to go down.
Expansion doesn't mean WVU or anyone else won't play the schools being played now, it means you might not play a couple of them every year--but you'll play them every other year or after a couple of seasons at worst. Not doing anything as Oklahoma's president has spelled out might mean after a few seasons you don't play these schools again at all.
Rematches can and do occur in the larger conferences that don't play round-robin. Of course, they happen much more infrequently than every year. I think that what gets lost when people get buzz-word happy and base the whole argument for a game on the magical "13th data point," is the reality that an additional data point can be either positive or negative.
There would over time be some years where the 13th would be BOTH positive and DISpositive (meaning the team winning the conference championship game would be excluded but for the win from the playoff).
The question remains though would those years be frequent enough to MORE THAN offset the years where the 13th is negative and dispositive and the only viable Big 12 team gets excluded because it lost the game. This year provides an example of that potential. OSU was second and lost to OU in the regular season finale. Had they played again the next week and OSU won, the Big 12 would almost certainly have had no team in the playoff. Rematches also don't become that hugely less likely if we went to 8 games. Rematches would not be the only possibility but when every team plays 8 of the 9 others they would remain very common. (Especially if UT gets it act together and annually plays OU.)
Moreover, the negative 13th point possibility is, of course, not limited to a rematch scenario. Let's say we did revert to 8 conference games and the championship game was not a rematch. It would still be damaging if a 11-1 team lost to a 10-2 or 9-3 team it had not played. Going to divisions would probably increase the likelihood of games where the team entering as the lower ranked team had no viable shot at the playoff even with a win. If the best 2 teams are in the same division you necessarily have at best the 3rd team in the championship game whereas without divisions the game would always be the "best" 2 teams playing.
Now, money, exposure, etc., might still tip the scale in favor if having a game but in terms of getting teams into the playoff, it could easily hurt as or more frequently than it helps.
The other thing to think about is how long will the playoff remain at only 4 teams? Once it goes to 8 then our champion would virtually (if not by rule) be assured a spot and having a championship game then that is won by the #1 team could knock the losing team out of the expanded playoff.
It's good we got the ability to decide how we want to proceed, but that doesn't mean we should rashly jump into a championship game.
There would over time be some years where the 13th would be BOTH positive and DISpositive (meaning the team winning the conference championship game would be excluded but for the win from the playoff).
The question remains though would those years be frequent enough to MORE THAN offset the years where the 13th is negative and dispositive and the only viable Big 12 team gets excluded because it lost the game. This year provides an example of that potential. OSU was second and lost to OU in the regular season finale. Had they played again the next week and OSU won, the Big 12 would almost certainly have had no team in the playoff. Rematches also don't become that hugely less likely if we went to 8 games. Rematches would not be the only possibility but when every team plays 8 of the 9 others they would remain very common. (Especially if UT gets it act together and annually plays OU.)
Moreover, the negative 13th point possibility is, of course, not limited to a rematch scenario. Let's say we did revert to 8 conference games and the championship game was not a rematch. It would still be damaging if a 11-1 team lost to a 10-2 or 9-3 team it had not played. Going to divisions would probably increase the likelihood of games where the team entering as the lower ranked team had no viable shot at the playoff even with a win. If the best 2 teams are in the same division you necessarily have at best the 3rd team in the championship game whereas without divisions the game would always be the "best" 2 teams playing.
Now, money, exposure, etc., might still tip the scale in favor if having a game but in terms of getting teams into the playoff, it could easily hurt as or more frequently than it helps.
The other thing to think about is how long will the playoff remain at only 4 teams? Once it goes to 8 then our champion would virtually (if not by rule) be assured a spot and having a championship game then that is won by the #1 team could knock the losing team out of the expanded playoff.
It's good we got the ability to decide how we want to proceed, but that doesn't mean we should rashly jump into a championship game.
What two teams are there for the Big XII?
Cincinnati, UCONN, BYU, Memphis, these teams I've seen mentioned at various times on this message board would be just adding warm bodies to get to 12 members. IMO not worth going to a 12 member conference with just barely above mid-major team(s).
Cincinnati, UCONN, BYU, Memphis, these teams I've seen mentioned at various times on this message board would be just adding warm bodies to get to 12 members. IMO not worth going to a 12 member conference with just barely above mid-major team(s).
If other conferences didn't have a championship game then arguments about the BIG 12 not playing one because of "risks" might be valid. Considering the BIG 12 conference petitioned for and received (although not like they wanted) the ability to play a CCG its pretty clear that even they have moved beyond the failed idea that it doesn't matter. The BIG 12 is at a disadvantage, there's no getting away from that.
Based on WHAT exactly? Again--the president of OKLAHOMA believes there are schools NOW the conference could add that add value and make sense. Boren has looked at the evidence, you are speaking based on the emotion that you are "too good" for them without considering the evidence that disproves that silly notion.
Buck...you are talking to a stone wall. Too many folks on the board are thinking with their ego (hey, we're elite and you're not!), and not with a long term strategic view. They are also using the "selective memory gene" and forget how close WVU was to being left out in the cold. The president of Oklahoma gets it but I guess a lot of folks on this board are smarter than he is. lol
how about a contingency championship game . I there is an undefeated conference team NO game if there are two teams with one or two losses then have the playoff. Although a bit convoluted a game could be planned tentatively and if need implemented Before anyone says it cant be done IT CAN thats why sucessful corporations businesses govt hae contingencies plans
Well, granted the President of OU has more power/leverage than 8 of the other Presidents and that means something, but it doesn't mean his opinion is smarter, more strategic or better for the conference as a whole beyond his holding a card most of the others don't-- a viable threat to leave if he doesn't get his way.