I do agree with that. Absolutely agree with everything here. It's because of everything here that I think the big 12 network would be a disaster. Again, agree. It's the disparity between value of half of the teams vs the other that I think makes this more natural even if it's not justifiable. None of the other conferences except the big east (ticking timebomb) wanted any of the would be leftover teams of a big 12 collapse. Yea it would be nice but again I just don't think it's really ever going to happen. I agree with this however the bigger point is that it's rare that the winner in the old north division was the 2nd best team in the conference by division or general consensus. That's why you had bowls reach past the big 12 north winner to take the 2nd place team from the south division. In that case, it's more likely the 2nd place team in the 10 team division is playing for the playoffs than a 12 team. I agreed with this. The issue for me was that it would have given Baylor/TCU the chance to play their way into the playoffs the year before. In 1 scenario a team was guaranteed a spot and in the other 3 teams would have been given the chance to win their way in. Many at OU and Texas were against the conference championship back in the day because it very rarely ever would help the south winner. I'm not really following you here. I agree there are pros and cons. There is not real consensus on how to decide which side out weights the other.... Pac 12? Four pods of 4 teams and stage 2 round playoff to determine the conference champion. OU/Ok St/UT/ TT or TCU vs Utah/Colorado/Arizona/Arizona St vs UCLA/USC/Cal/Stanford(BRUTAL) vs Washington/Oreogan/ Oreogan St/Washington St vs
More likely yes, but you would also need your 2nd best team to be in the Top 5-6 to have a chance at jumping into the Top 4. That was the case in 2014 and a game would have helped that year for sure. But the other 3 years featured a 2nd place team outside of the Top 10 (outside the Top 20 this year) so hard to imagine they'd jump all the way into the Top 4 if they did pull the upset. In other words, looking at the 4 years of the new Big 12, there seems to only be 1 year where a CG would have helped for sure. It wouldn't have this past year and I think it's debatable how much a game would have helped Baylor and KSU in 2012 and 2013. They would have played a non-top 10 team that they already beat earlier in the season. Would that have been enough to jump them into the playoffs? A win wouldn't hurt obviously but an upset would haven taken the conference out. [/QUOTE]
Again, it is much much less likely that you will ever have two teams competing for the top 4 in a two division championship game. On top of that, you will always have the better team in a position to lose their place in the top 4 with a loss. At least with a 10 team championship game you can find advantages as well as disadvantages. If you are just advocating a 10 team no conf championship then you are right there there is nothing for a team to lose other than inactivity. However there could be something to gain. I think it's hard to evaluate the impact of a championship game in 12 and 13 because you aren't working with the new playoff system. However if you base it on AP (Human Poll), in 12' you had #6 Baylor at 11-1 play #11 OU at 10-2. A Baylor win would put them in a tie with Michigan St at 12-1. However, Michigan just came off a win against Ohio St so Baylor would have likely been left out at #5 but they would have still been extremely close. Again, this is all conjecture because this was before the playoff system/committee. There is a reason that that 3rd party firm concluded a conference championship and expansion would only increase the chances at making the playoffs for the big 12 at %5. At the end of the day, I feel like it's a better product to take the top 2 teams at the end of the year in a 10 team conference compared to what we had come to expect from the old big 12 north but it's clearly debatable. I can just hope that we all agree Boren is ridiculous and (I believe) has done more harm to the conference than good.
Hmm maybe we were debating 2 different issues because this is the end all be all for me. A conference championship game makes zero sense in a 10 team round robin league but if it clearly increased our chances at the playoffs, then I'd say why the hell not. A lot of things in the current Big 12 don't make a lot of sense so what is one more thing. But at a 5% increase? I don't think it merits the game especially considering that there was an upset 33% of the Championship games in the old Big 12. And that didn't always feature the 2nd best team in the conference like you said. Think the chances increase that much more when it's the clear #1 and #2.
You can see the report here: http://www.cbssports.com/collegefoo...-knew-12-teams-title-game-are-best-for-league Yea none of it really matters I guess. The conference either goes after big programs when tv contracts next expire or probably bust.
Tillman puts the Big 12 and UT on blast. Yikes. http://www.cbssports.com/college-fo...-makes-strong-case-for-houston-in-the-big-12/
The only people who think these quotes are impactful are UH alumni. The rest of the sports world recognizes what they are: a rich, biased booster whining about not getting his way.
That's pretty much all this entire version of the Peepee Games: Mockingjay Part 2 is. Speaking of well heeled boosters whining: Red McCombs: The Big 12 should add Houston; San Antonio was 'this close' to getting the Raiders
Honestly, I haven't agreed with a word that has come out of McCombs's mouth this decade. Not sure he's the guy you want tooting your horn, ha.
I never saw the final top 20 for college football games in Houston ratings but the one donny (IIRC) posted toward the end of the season only had a handful in the top 20. Conference Championship and bowl are obviously going to shoot to the top. The school doesn't present an existing draw in the Houston market unless it has at least %40 out of that market but it's just not there. You don't git a good chunk of that market if you look at UH ratings right now. Maybe it goes up a lot next year. If they had that share then they would be a must add target for every conference. Expanding the playoffs to 8 teams will greatly reduce the need to be in a power 5 to win but the money disparity is still bananas. He had a real foot in mouth moment about the Charlie Strong hiring. I just love how he follows "It's still [close]" because, "[They] couldn't get the owner to agree to make the move." That sure is close. Radio Interview in spoiler. Spoiler <iframe width="100%" height="450" scrolling="no" frameborder="no" src="https://w.soundcloud.com/player/?url=https%3A//api.soundcloud.com/tracks/263481700&auto_play=false&hide_related=false&show_comments=true&show_user=true&show_reposts=false&visual=true"></iframe>
I hope this guy builds us another trading center but he's got a little John Jenkins or Sherwood Blunt in him, just hope he can keep it between the ditches.
I know I'm not the only one to say this, but it would be great if you could just speak in normal sentences. We've all read Faulkner and Dostoevsky, nobody needs it again on the internet.
Wow this is relevant. This should tell you why the big 12 is not interested in UH and why they don't attract a lot of attention from other conferences in spite of the Houston market. Could be different next year with the hype they've been building. Per mark Berman: Top 20 TV Games in Houston Market Conference Breakdown (%45) SEC 9 games (%35) Big 12 7 Games (%10) UH: 2 Games (%10) Big 10: 2 Games
UT should be embarrassed. All their resources and they suck balls. VY/Mack/TJ Ford era aside it's been that way for decades. Never seen a school with so much resources be so ****.
Think if UH played Baylor, TCU, Texas, Okla or OkSt they might've had more games on that list? Navy and Temple don't exactly move the needle. Like saying there's no market for UT because they rated low when they played Rice.
LOL This has basically already been posted. http://bbs.clutchfans.net/showpost.php?p=10217376&postcount=290 Not sure where those new ratings came from.
LOL, aside from those 12 straight seasons with 9+ wins in football, 24 out of 27 years making the tournament, and the most College World Series appearances of any team ever, Texas has sucked FOR DECADES!!1!!!1!!
What adult man says LOL? These rankings came from Mark Berman which I trust more than wherever the other numbers came from. The difference is 1 less UH game and 1 more big 12 game which is the crux of the entire uh to the big 12-UH issue. Anyone who looks at this graphic and thinks the big 12 doesn't have a big chunk of the Houston market and that UH is the solution for taking over the SEC isn't living in reality.
